Skip to main content

Full text of "A history of the Jewish people"

See other formats

• SHI ■'•'■'■' ■'■'^■ : 
' ''" ' : ' "'■'•-■"■ '■'■■.■ '■ 





■■■■■•■.•■■ /' 
...■..- 1 


"■■" ' : ' ■ L ' '■"'■'■ 


■ ■''■'''■-";■' 


>: ■'■ ■' : l j • ' ' • Efl ■ ' ■''■' ' 

• :..•".'••.':■■.:'•■•'•■■.:■'• 
' : .--•■;.■.:■: '••,' • i« .-:■'•.■• ' 

r.. -;-L. . ■.■:■■■■,■?::>•.:-■-:.■■:■■ -. . . ■ 


'■■■:■. f. '■'■'■■■■'• ■■:'■ hb» 


3 1404 00695 1336 




- 1 8 


■ ki AD 

i 1 ortfn 


1 4 luui 



3, IDAHO 83460-040 


Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2012 with funding from 
Brigham Young University-Idaho 

Cfte ffigtotical ^eneg for 'Bible ^ttttentg. 


Professor CHARLES F. KENT, Ph.D., of Brown University, 


Professor FRANK K. SANDERS, Ph.D., of Yale University. 

Sfolume iv. 




During the Maccabean and Roman Periods (including 

New Testament Times) 

- ■ - U 

Cfte historical ©erfcs for iBible gttiucnrs 

Edited by Processor CHARLES F. KENT, Ph.D., of Yale University, and 
Professor FRANK K. SANDERS, Ph.D., formerly of Yale University 

IN response to a widespread demand for non-technical yet scholarly and reliable guides 
to the study of the history, literature, and teaching of the Old and New Testaments, 
and of the contemporary history and literature, this series aims to present in concise and 
attractive form the results of investigation and exploration in these broad fields. Based 
upon thoroughly critical scholarship, it will emphasize assured and positive rather than 
transitional positions. The series as a whole is intended to present a complete and con- 
nected picture of the social, political, and religious life of the men and peoples who figure 
most prominently in the biblical records. 

Each volume is complete in itself, treating comprehensively a given subject or period. 
It also refers freely to the biblical and monumental sources, and to the standard authori- 
ties. Convenience of size, clearness of presentation, and helpfulness to the student make 
the series particularly well adapted for (i) practical text-books for college, seminary, and 
university classes; (2) handbooks for the use of Bible classes, clubs, and guilds; (3) guides 
for individual study; and (4) books for general reference. 


1. The United Kingdom. Sixth edi- Charles F. Kent, Ph.D., Professor of 

tion. Biblical Literature, Yale University. 

2. The Divided Kingdom. Sixth edi- 



3. The Babylonian, Persian, and Greek Charles F. Kent, Ph.D., Professor of 

Periods. Biblical Literature, Yale University. 

4. The Maccabean and Roman Period James S. Riggs, D.D., Professor of Bib- 
(includlng New Testament Times). lical Criticism, Auburn Theological 



5. History of the Ancient Egyptians. James H. Breasted, Ph.D., Professor of 

Egyptology and Oriental History, The 
University of Chicago. 

6. History of the Babylonians and George S. Goodspeed, Ph.D., Professor 

Assyrians. of Ancient History, The University of 



7. The Life of Jesus. Rush Rhees, President of the University 

of Rochester. 

8. The Apostolic Age. George T. Ptjrves, Ph.D., D.D., late 

Professor of New Testament Literature 
and Exegesis, Princeton Theological 


9. From Earliest Times to 200 A. D. Frank K. Sanders, Ph.D., Professor of 

Biblical Literature, Yale University, 
and Henry T. Fowler, Ph.D., Pro- 
fessor of Biblical Literature and His- 
tory, Brown University. 















168 Conquest of Mueedonla 

Autiochus IV. E 
Antiochus V. { 


itlon of Jews 

of Temple 

i li oron. Heath of >leanor 

149 Third Punic War 
146 1 'apt urc of Carthage 
aim Corinth 

Demetrius I. S< 

Alexander Baj 

Demetrius II. 


ing and llltfli PricHt 

133 Acquisition of the Kingdom 
of Pergumus 

Antlochus 8lj 
Demetrius II. 


• la 

iple destroyed 
a ered 

111-106 .1 incur tli I iu War 
102-101 Victories of Marlus 

Antiochus Cy 


100 Birth of Julius Caesar 

86 Capture of Athens by Sulla 

Antioehus En 
Demetrius II 

- iiion subdued 



73-72 Victories of Lucullus 
69 Victory over Tlgranes 
66 Pompey sent to Asia 
60 First Triumvirate 

Tigrnnca the .' 

Sjrla a Romai 

65 65-62 Aeniilli 

61-60 Murclu 

res Jerusalem 

s it IJoiiiau Province 

• OlltJ, 

47 Cwsnr Perpetual Dictator 
44 Caesar Assassinated 

57-55 A. (iabt 
53-51 C. L 
50-49 Vcjent 
47-46 Sextus 
44 L.Marcus 

rs the Temple 
it ii re Jerusalem 

36 Antony's Parthian War 
31 Battle of Actium 


I 27 

32-31 I* Bibu 
30 Q, IHdius 
29 M. Corrini. 
28 M. Tulllus 
26-23 Varro 

InjC of Judea 

A lljr-lloll ll< 

23-13 M. Agri 

10 M. Tltlus 
9-6 C. Sentlu» 
6-4 P. Varus 
3-2 P. Sulplci 

rebuilding the Temple 


1-4 C. Caesar 
4-5 L. Volus 
6 P. Sulplc 

11-17 Q. Cu-eili 
17-19 On. Calrtd 
19-21 Cn. Sen 

. rased, Judea taken 
ontrol of Rome 


er Qiilrlnius und 




Culigul a 


21-32 L. Aclii 

32-35 E. Pom 
35-39 L. Vltef 
39-42 P. Petrisness 

sent to Rome to answer 
ii Judea 


42-44 C. Vibi 
45-50 C. Cass 
50-60 C. I'm ii 

ign reign of 


ul rebellion under 

tbrcaks begin which 



60-63 Cn. Do 
63-66 C. Cestl 
67-69 C. Licil 


the war of 66 A I> 
clore war against Rome 
d the Temple destroyed 
















Copyright, 1900, 
By Charles Scribner's Sons. 





faiths became more explicit, and national hopes were 
intensified. Indeed, the very conditions were brought 
about which made it impossible for Jesus to gain the 
ear of the nation and to save it from itself. While, 
therefore, this work is meant to be a history of the 
Jewish people for two hundred and forty years of its 
existence, it is no less a contribution toward the 
interpretation of the gospels in so far as a knowledge 
of the faiths, conditions, and aims of Judaism can be 
interpretative of the form and method of the activity 
of Jesus. 

It is a pleasure to acknowledge my indebtedness 
to Professors Charles F. Kent, Ph.D., and Frank K. 
Sanders, Ph.D., for their valuable critical suggestions 
and for their cordial assistance whenever needed. 

Auburn, Feb. 9, 1900. 






Sections 1-10. Pages 1-13 

Section 1. Limits of the period. 2. Sources of information. 
3. The First Book of Maccabees. 4. The Second Book of 
Maccabees. 5. The Jewish War and Antiquities of Josephus. 
6. The Book of Daniel and the Book of Enoch. 7. The main 
literary interest of Alexandrian Judaism. 8. The beginnings 
of philosophic harmonization in Alexandria. 9. The Book of 
Wisdom. 10. The Sibylline Oracles. 




Sections 11-26. Pages 14-28 

Section 11. The spiritual forces in conflict. 12. Hellenism in 
Judea. 13. The uncompromising spirit of Judaism. 14. The 
increasing antagonism of Judaism to Hellenism. 15. Antio- 
chus Epiphanes and the high-priesthood. 16. The treachery 
of Menelaus. 17. Jason's venture and its terrible issue in 
Jerusalem. 18. The Romans meet Antiochus in Egypt. 19. 
The disastrous result of that meeting to the Jews. 20. Jerusa- 
lem's destruction and the flight of many of its citizens. 21. 


The time of sifting ; the impulse toward expanding the canon 
of Scripture. 22. The faith that would not swerve. 23. 
The fidelity of Mattathias in Modein. 24. The uplifting 
of the standard of Judaism. 25. The beginning of the strug- 
gle. 26. The company of the Hasideans and the death of 



Sections 27-43. Pages 29-44 

Section 27. The sons of Mattathias. 28. The victories of Judas 
over Apollonius and Seron. 29. The army under Nicanor, 
Ptolemy, and Gorgias that was to root out the Jews. 30. Its 
double discomfiture. 31. The battle of Bethsur. 32. The 
restoration and rededication of the temple. 33. Judaism 
takes fresh courage ; it guards anew the temple and inquires 
after its sacred writings. 34. Judas devotes attention to neigh- 
boring hostile peoples. 35. The successful campaigns in 
Galilee and across the Jordan. 36. The unfortunate attempt 
of Joseph and Azarias. 37. The death of Antiochus Epiph- 
anes. 38. The ensuing rivalries in the Syrian court. 39. 
The battle of Bethzacharias. 40. The second part of the 
Book of Enoch. 41. Judaism's dark hour. 42. Unexpected 
deliverance and complete religious freedom. 43. The situation 
in Judea. r 



Sections 44-57. Pages 45-57 

Section 44. The new reason for conflict ; the high-priest Alcimus. 
45. Startling changes in the Syrian court. 46. Bacchides 
installs Alcimus, and the Hasideans suffer. 47. The mischiev- 
ous activity of Alcimus. 48. The battle of Capharsalama. 
49. The victory of Adasa and "Nicanor's Day." 50. Judas 
appeals to Rome. 51. An alliance formed and Syria warned, 
52. The defeat and death of Judas. 53. The Hellenists tri- 
umph for a while; Jonathan chosen leader of the nation. 54. 
Jonathan repulses Bacchides. 55. Alcimus again shows his 


Hellenistic aims. 56. The Hellenists conspire against Jona- 
than, who affects an alliance with Bacchides. 57. Jonathan 
makes Michmash his capital and cements his power. 


Sections 58-71. Pages 58-71 

Section 58. A court comedy in Syria in which Jonathan has a 
part. 59. Jonathan's splendid gains from rivalries in Syria. 
60. Jonathan defeats Apollonius near Jamnia. 61. Demetrius 
II. becomes King of Syria. 62. Jonathan obtains more terri- 
tory and privileges. 63. Jonathan's proof of friendship to 
Demetrius. 64. Antiochus, son of Alexander, wins the support 
of Jonathan, who afterward defeats Demetrius. 65. Jonathan 
renews friendship with Rome and Sparta. 66. The land is 
guarded against Demetrius. 67. The citadel cut off by a wall. 
68. Tryphon's treachery and Jonathan's imprisonment. 69. 
Simon takes the leadership; Jonathan murdered. 70. The 
national situation at this time. 71. Judea gains political 



Sections 72-88. Pages 72-86 

Section 72. The twofold relationship of the Jews in Antioch and 
Alexandria. 73. The flight of Onias to Egypt. 74. The 
temple near Leontopolis. 75. The relation of this temple to 
the temple in Jerusalem. 76. The real reason for building the 
temple in Egypt. 77. The true genius of Egyptian Judaism. 
78. The two facts which help to explain the character of nearly 
all Grseco-Jewish literature. 79. The acquaintance of the 
Jews with the literature of the Greeks. 80. The philosophic 
interest of the Alexandrian Jews. 81. The work of Aristobu- 
lus. 82. The general character of the Book of Wisdom. 83. 
Its great theme. 84. Wisdom in its relations to God. 85. The 
comprehensiveness of the term on its human side. 86. The 
teachings of the book about God and the life beyond. 87. 
The message of the Sibyl. 88. Outline of Book III. of Sibyl- 
line Oracles and the purpose of the book. 




Sections 89-98. Pages 87-96 

Section 89. Simon's vigorous action in capturing Gazara, Bethsur, 
and the citadel in Jerusalem. 90. Changes attendant upon the 
capture of the citadel and Simon's successful administration of 
affairs. 91. His encouragement of commerce and agriculture. 
92. The unparalleled honor given him by the people. 93. Re- 
newed alliance with Rome ; its value. 94. Simon's coinage of 
money. 95. Fresh troubles in Syria, in which Simon becomes 
involved. 96. Jonathan and Judas, sons of Simon, defeat a 
Syrian army. 97. The treacherous murder of Simon and his 
sons. 98. The record of First Maccabees. 



Sections 99-105. Pages 97-104 

Section 99. John Hyrcanus, Simon's son, becomes leader and 
seeks to avenge the murder of his father. 100. Antiochus 
Sidetes besieges Hyrcanus in Jerusalem, but concludes a treaty 
of peace. 101. The probable influence of Rome. 102. The 
changes in Syrian affairs give Hyrcanus opportunity to establish 
himself in power. 103. He engages foreign troops, makes 
several successful expeditions, and destroys the Samaritan 
temple. 104. Compels the Idumeans to be circumcised. 105. 
He lays siege to Samaria and carries the northern boundary of 
the kingdom to Carmel and Scythopolis. 


Sections 106-117. Pages 105-116 

Section 106. The effect of territorial expansion upon the varied 
interests of the nation. 107. The party of the Pharisees. 
108. Their doctrine of Providence. 109. Their doctrine of the 
future life. 110. The party of the Sadducees. 111. Their 
doctrines of Providence and of the future life. 112. The effect 


of their creed upon their political activity. 113. The Essenes. 

114. The origin of the peculiar teachings promulgated by them. 

115. The breach of Hyrcanus with the Pharisees. 116. The 
method by which he opposed them. 117. The general character 
of his administration. 



Sections 118-130. Pages 117-126 

Section 118. The leading question of the time. 119. Aristobulus, 
the son of Hyrcanus, usurps the rulership and favors anti- 
Pharisaic tendencies. 120. His brief reign of one year ended 
by a fatal illness. 121. He is succeeded by the infamous Alex- 
ander Jannaeus. 122. His unsuccessful wars by which all the 
gains of the past were imperilled. 123. The timely interfer- 
ence of Cleopatra. 1 24. Successful expeditions to the east of 
the Jordan and into Philistia. 125. Jannasus insults the people 
at the Feast of Tabernacles, and a terrible massacre follows. 
126. The Pharisees stir up rebellion against him; civil war for 
six years. 127. Jannaeus is defeated at Shechem and becomes 
relentless against the Pharisees. 128. He becomes involved in 
Syrian troubles. 129. A period of successful campaigns is 
followed by his death in 78 B.C. 130. The results of his reign. 




Sections 131-146. Pages 127-139 

Section 131. Alexandra and the Pharisees. 132. How the 
interests of the law were furthered. 133. The revengeful spirit 
of the Pharisees. 134. Threatened invasion of Tigranes of 
Armenia. 135. Aristobulus and the Sadducees get possession 
of strongholds. 136. Alexandra dies. 137. Aristobulus com- 
pels Hyrcanus II., the rightful successor, to give him the ruler- 
ship, and the Pharisees are ignored. 138. Antipater, the 
Idumean, interferes, and Aristobulus is besieged upon the 
temple mount. 139. Scaurus, the Roman general, sides with 


Aristobulus. 140. Hyrcanus, Aristobulus, and the people make 
appeal to Pompey. 141. Pompey, being resisted by Aristobu- 
lus, resolves to take the city by force. 142. Aristobulus seizes 
the temple mount, but is finally overcome by the Romans. 
143. The administrative changes which made void the work of 
years. 144. The estimate of it all by the Pharisees. 145. The 
Psalms of Solomon ; their teaching regarding the Messiah. 
146. Their teaching about the resurrection and immortality of 
the righteous. 





Sections 147-159. Pages 143-153 

Section 147. The limits of the period. 148. The sources of 
information. 149. The value of Josephus for this period. 
150. The twofold value of the New Testament witness. 151. 
Rabbinical literature. 152. The Mishna, Talmuds, Midrashim, 
and Targums. 153. What may be learned from these Jewish 
works. 154. Sources of knowledge from the Roman side of 
the relations of Rome to Judea. 155. The two lines of de- 
velopment in the mental life of the nation. 156. The Psalms 
of Solomon. 157. The Assumption of Moses, — the voice of 
conservative Phariseeism. 158. The Book of Jubilees. 159. 
Later works which reveal the methods and hope of Judaism. 



Sections 160-178. Pages 154-169 

Section 160. The Jews in Rome and the attitude of the people 
in Judea. 161. The real value of Pompey's conquest of Judea 
and his policy. 162. The manner of acceptance of the con- 
quest by the Pharisees, the people and the Hellenistic centres. 
163. The first manifestation of national discontent. 164. The 


policy of Gabinius, the proconsul of Syria. 165. The revolu- 
tion under Aristobulus I. 166. The uprising under Alexander 
and the increased power of Antipater. 167. The new Triumvi- 
rate in Rome, Caesar, Pompey, and Crassus ; how it affected 
Judea. 168. The civil wars in Rome; Caesar crosses the 
_ Rubicon. 169. Aristobulus poisoned. 170. Pompey defeated 
at Pharsalia ; Caesar supports Cleopatra and gains mastery of 
Alexandria. 171. Antipater's substantial support of Caesar. 
172. Changes brought about in Judea through Antipater's 
friendship to Caesar. 173. Antipater's bold assumption of 
authority. 174. Herod's policy in Galilee ; he is summoned to 
Jerusalem for trial. 175. The political confusion consequent 
upon the assassination of Caesar. 176. Mark Antony's policy 
and Herod's gain from promptly following it. 177. Antipater 
poisoned ; estimate of his character and work. 1 78. Changes 
in the Roman sovereignty and the results in Judea. 



Sections 179-189. Pages 170-178 

Section 179. The Parthian invasion of Syria in 41 B.C. 180. 
Antigonus uses the occasion to regain the throne. 181. Herod, 
learning of the death of Phasael, flies for safety to Masada. 
182. Antigonus master of the situation, but unable to maintain 
himself. 183. Herod seeks out Antony, and while in Rome is 
appointed King of the Jews. 184. He lands at Ptolemais in 
39 B.C., and conquers Galilee and Joppa. 185. He advances 
upon Jerusalem, but is poorly supported by the Romans. 186. 
He makes direct appeal to Antony. 187. He meets reverses, 
but still resolutely pushes forward his cause. 188. He marries 
Mariamne. 189. With the help of Sosius, Herod besieges and 
captures Jerusalem ; Antigonus beheaded. 



Sections 190-205. Pages 179-190 

Section 190. The sharp contrasts in Herod's character and their 
reflection in the life of Jerusalem. 191. The two guiding prin- 
ciples of his whole career. 192. The initial acts of his actual 


kingship. 193. He appoints Ananel high-priest and closely 
watches Hyrcanus. 194. Alexandra, daughter of Hyrcanus, 
secures by diplomacy the appointment of her son, Aristobulus 
III., as high-priest. 195. Aristobulus murdered at Jericho. 
196. Herod is summoned before Antony. 197. Herod gains 
the favor of Antony. 198. Salome arouses suspicions of Herod 
against Marianine. 199. Cleopatra is given all the cities south 
of the Eleutherus River. 200. Octavian denounces Antony 
before the Roman Senate. 201. In the battle of Actium, 
B.C. 31, Octavian becomes sole master of the Roman world ; 
Herod at once supports him. 202. Herod gives substantial 
proof of his new allegiance. 203. Octavian accepts Herod as 
an ally. 204. Herod puts Mariamne to death. 205. Herod's 
terrible remorse, illness, and fury against Alexandra and the 
sons of Babas. 


Sections 206-221. Pages 191-202 

Section 206. The tendency of the Roman world toward the issue 
reached in the supremacy of Augustus. 207. The double rela 
tionship of Herod's position. 208. The two large duties laid 
upon Herod by Augustus. 209. The tidal wave of Hellenism 
over Jerusalem. 210. Herod establishes fortresses. 211. His 
system of espionage. 212. The better side of Herod's pur- 
poses. 213. £he supreme ambition of all his striving. 214. 
How his passion for building found expression. 215. His 
measures to develop the business of the country. 216. The 
great harbor at Csesarea. 217. The Hellenizing influences 
about his court. 218. His proposition to build a new temple 
and the probable motive actuating him. 219. The manner and 
the time of the work upon this temple. 220. The general 
character of it and Judaism's appropriation of it. 221. The 
insult of the golden eagle. 


Sections 222-234. Pages 203-214 

Section 222. The glory of Herod's reign and the one significant 
impossibility in it. 223. The education of Herod's sons and 
their reception in Judea. 224. The visit of Agrippa, the com- 


missioner of Augustus, to Judea. 225. Herod's domestic 
troubles. 226. The dark treachery of Antipater, Herod's son 
by Doris, his first wife. 227. Herod's quarrel with Syllaeus 
and his rescue from disgrace by Nicolas of Damascus. 228. 
The mischievous Lacedaemonian, Eurycles, who compasses the 
death of Herod's sons, Aristobulus and Alexander. 229. The 
continual treachery of Antipater. 230. Herod discovers the true 
character of Antipater. 231. The young man is summoned 
from Rome, tried, and put to death. 232. Herod's illness, the 
report of his death, and the consequent activity in removing 
profanations from the land. 233. His determination to make 
the land mourn at the time of his death. 234. The Babe in 
the manger in Bethlehem. 



Sections 235-256. Pages 215-231 

Section 235. The characteristics by which we can estimate the 
nation's inner life. 236. The antagonisms which reveal its 
power. 237. The foundation of faith laid in childhood. 238. 
The only education for the mass of Jewish boys. 239. The true 
school of the nation. 240. The officials and order of service in 
the synagogue. 241. The synagogue and the scribes. 24 £, The 
scribes and their threefold task. 243. The bearing of the law 
upon life ; the Halacha and Haggada. 244. The Halacha, *he 
complete expression of Judaism ; two much-discussed themes in 
the Mishna. 245. The golden days of scribism. 246. The 
administrative functions of the scribes. 247. The honor which 
they received and the spirit they cherished. 248. The result 
of their labors in the life of the nation. 249. The bearing of 
scribal teaching upon the temple worship. 250. The char- 
acter of the higher classes of priests ; the two forces devitaliz- 
ing the worship of the Holy Place. 251. The hope of the 
nation in the Messiah. 252. The Messiah of the second part 
of the Book of Enoch; of the fourth part; of the Psalms of 
Solomon. 253. The only way to bring the glorious day of the 
Messiah's presence. 254. The Messianic hope in Alexandrian 
literature. 255. The teachings which intensified the charm of 
this hope. 256. The nation and its hopes. 




Sections 257-275. Pages 232-245 

Section 257. The provisions of Herod's will. 258. The desper- 
ate beginning of Archelaus in Judea. 259. Varus sent from 
Antioch to quell rebellion ; the robbery of the temple by Sa- 
binus. 260. The rapid spread of revolt in the land. 261. The 
settlement of Herod's will. 262. The sad condition of affairs 
facing Antipas and Archelaus upon their return from Rome. 
263. The short and tyrannical rule of Archelaus. 264. The 
character of Antipas and the price he paid for royal favor. 

265. Some of the notable public buildings erected by Antipas. 

266. His amour with Herodias and its consequences. 267. He 
is defeated by Aretas. 268. The accession of Caligula and 
Herod's banishment to Gaul. 269. The character of Philip 
and his successful reign. 270. Agrippa's early career. 271. 
Agrippa receives favors from Caligula, who soon after causes 
widespread trouble by his insanity. 272. After Caligula's 
assassination, Agrippa helps Claudius to the throne. 273. The 
value of Agrippa's short reign to Judaism. 274. His politic 
course of procedure. 275. His sudden death at Csesarea. 



Sections 276-290. Pages 246-257 

Section 276. The earnest but mistaken desire of the people to be 
added to the province of Syria. 277. The arrangement of 
Roman provinces under Augustus, and their respective methods 
of government. 278. The census under Quirinius and the 
opposition to it. 279. The formation of the party of the Zeal- 
ots. 280. The collectors of custom in Palestine. 281. The 
Sanhedrin, — its members, power, and jurisdiction. 282. The 
character and policy of Pontius Pilate. 283. The quiet, inter- 
mediate reign of Agrippa I. followed by the government by 
procurators. 284. The procuratorship of Cuspius Fadus. 
285. The change of policy by Claudius in the appointment of 
Tiberius Alexander, as procurator. 286. The increasing tur- 
bulence of the Zealots during the procuratorship of Cumanus. 


287. The severity and cruelty of Felix call out the Sicarii ; dis- 
order increases rapidly. 288. Festus deals with a virtual state 
of anarchy. 289. The desperate situation while Albinus is pro- 
curator. 290. Gessius Florus exhausts the patience of the 
nation ; it is ready to plunge into open, determined rebellion. 


Sections 291-317. Pages 260-277 

Section 291. The refusal to offer the daily sacrifice for the em- 
peror — a declaration of war. 292. The treacherous deeds of 
Florus and their results. 293. His deliberate plans to expose 
the people to fatal risk. 294. The attempt of Agrippa II. to 
persuade the people to give up all thoughts of rebellion. 295. 
The seizure of Masada by the Jews ; the endeavor of the 
Pharisees to avert the war. 296. Agrippa accepts invitation 
of Pharisees to send an army to Jerusalem ; the insurgents vic- 
torious and destructive. 297. Rapid progress of the revolu- 
tionists, yet not without divisions among themselves. 298. 
Cestius Gallus interferes and is badly defeated by the Jews. 
299. Active preparations made by Romans and revolutionists 
for a determined war. 300. The work of preparation under 
Josephus in Galilee; his conflicts with the Zealots. 301. Ves- 
pasian marches unhindered into Galilee. 302. The terrible 
siege of Jotapata. 303. Tiberias and Tarichaea submit to the 
Romans. 304. Gamala, Itabryrium, and Gischala are also sub- 
dued. 305. Nero dies, and Vespasian, being chosen emperor, 
hands over to Titus the siege of Jerusalem. 306. Civil war 
in Jerusalem. 307. The Zealots treacherously secure the help 
of the Idumeans. 308. The reign of terror continues in Jeru- 
salem. 309. Simon, an outlaw, invited by the Moderate party 
into the city; the city torn by factions. 310. The coming of 
the Romans. 311. The Ions siege and the advance of the 
Romans within the second wall. 312. The capture of the 
third wall and the fortress of Antonia. 313. The temple en- 
closure seized and the temple burned. 314. The capture of 
the upper city. 315. The fortresses of Herodium and Ma- 
chaerus surrender ; the desperate resistance and final self-murder 
of the garrison at Masada. 316. The Jewish state a thing of 
the past; the survival of Judaism. 317. The great triumph 
in Rome and the arch of Titus. 




Sections 318-333. Pages 278-286 

Section 318. The unshaken faith of Judaism and the lesson 
from its calamity. 319. The new centre at Jamnia. 320. 
The policy of the Romans after the war. 321. The task of 
Judaism. 322. The rapid recuperation of the land in popu- 
lation. 323. The outrage of Hadrian and the blind folly of 
the nation. 324. The outcome of this second awful crisis. 
325. The spirit of the Judaism of the Dispersion. 326. The 
importance of the Synagogue in the Dispersion. 327. Philo 
Judaeus and his mission. 328. The fidelity of Alexaudrian 
Judaism to the great principles of faith. 329. The policy of 
the Roman emperors toward the Jews of the Dispersion. 330. 
The Dispersion really a contradiction within the Empire. 331. 
The proselyting spirit of the Dispersion. 332. The twofold 
interest of the Jews thus scattered abroad. 333. The terrible 
outbreak under Trajan and its issue. 

Appendix I. The Seleucidae 289 

Appendix II. The Genealogy of the Hasmoneans . . • 290 

Appendix III. The House of the Herods 291 

Appendix IV. Outline of Walls about Jerusalem in 

70 a.d 292 

Appendix V. Are there Maccabean Psalms? .... 293-296 
Appendix VI. Books of Reference upon Jewish History 297-301 

Books of Reference 302-303 

References 304-308 

Index of Names and Subjects 311-317 

Index of References to Biblical and Extra- 
Biblical Sources 318-320 



Chronological Chart Frontispiece 

Map of Palestine containing Places for 

Maccabean Period to face page 32 

Map of Palestine containing Places for 

Roman Period , to face page 1 73 

The Hellenistic World about the Cen- 
tral and Eastern Mediterranean . to face page 289 








1. The Maccabean period of the history of the Jews 
is named from Judas Maccabeus, the first and most 
illustrious chieftain of that family of Jewish patriots 
who led the religious revolt in Judea against Anti- 
ochus Epiphanes, and who secured for their people 
religious and political freedom. The beginning of 
the period, therefore, was coincident with the open- 
ing of the struggle in 168 B. c. ; its close was in 
63 b. c, when the Romans took control in Palestine. 
The tide of Greek influences which Alexander and 
his successors brought upon the land of Israel met 
with earnest opposition on the part of many in the 
Jewish nation. For a long time before the actual 
issue came, that opposition could have been quickly 
crystallized into open and unyielding resistance. The 
decisive moment, however, was in 168 B. c, when 
Mattathias, with the war-cry of "Zeal for the Law," 
summoned the faithful to stand with him against the 
Syrians. Brilliant successes carried the movement 
forward within three years to the completion of its 
first stage of progress in the rededication of the temple 
in 165 B. c. Then with political, as well as religious 
aims, the struggle continued until 142 B. c, when 
Judea achieved political independence. The whole 


period, therefore, can be conveniently divided into 
three parts, — that of gathering power and brilliant 
aggression, 168-165 B. c. ; that of religious freedom, 
162-142 B. c. ; that of religious freedom and political 
independence, 142-63 b. c. 

2. The main sources of information regarding this 
period are the First and Second Books of Maccabees 
and Josephus. Of these only Josephus gives a con- 
nected history of the whole period. Back of his 
work, as also back of the Books of Maccabees, lay 
sources known to us now only from the names of their 
authors, or from quotations and fragments which in 
different ways have been preserved. There was cer- 
tainly no lack of historical interest in reference to this 
critical epoch. Supplementary information can be 
gleaned from the general histories of Greek writers, 
Polybius, Diodorus, and Appian; from rabbinic litera- 
ture; from the literary products of the period itself; 
from the witness of coins, and from the rich results 
of archaeological and geographical work in Palestine 
during the past thirty years. 

3. The brief, vivid narrative of I. Maccabees be- 
gins with an account of the events which led to the 
Maccabean uprising and ends with the death of Simon. 
For the forty years (175-135 B. c.) which its history 
covers, it is an invaluable source of knowledge. Its 
simple, straightforward style, its generally trustworthy 
statements and its attention to details, reveal the 
true historian. From its reference to the Romans as 
friends, and to the history of John Hyrcanus, the date 
of its writing may be fixed at some time in the early 
part of the first century B. c. Its clear, definite ac- 
quaintance with events at such a remove from the 


time of writing presupposes existing written sources. 
The writer is a Palestinian Jew, whose point of view 
is that of orthodox Judaism, and yet it is notable how 
little the author, despite all the trust in Providence 
which breathes through the book, seeks to explain 
events by other than natural causes. In this respect 
the work is the direct opposite of II. Maccabees, 
which shows a marked predilection for the marvel- 
lous. Nor is this the only difference between these 
two records of Maccabean history. It seems to be the 
aim of the writer of the First Book to let events speak 
for themselves, and to find in the simple recital of 
noble deeds the best teaching of religious devotion. 
The author of the Second Book, on the contrary, 
keeps continually before his reader the religious bear- 
ing and value of the history. 

4. The Second Book begins with the attack upon 
the temple by Heliodorus, the minister of the Syrian 
monarch Seleucus IV. (175 B. a), and ends with the 
victory of Judas Maccabeus over Nicanor in 160 b. c. 
For the few years which preceded the reign of An- 
tiochus Epiphanes, it is our sole authority. Like 
the First Book, it is written from the point of view 
of orthodox Judaism and was dependent upon written 
sources. Indeed, with the exception of chapters i. 
and ii., it claims to be (ii. 24-32) an epitomization of 
a work written by Jason of Cyrene not long after 160 
B. c The chronological parallelism of the accounts 
of I. and II. Maccabees, through several successive 
3 T ears of the history, affords opportunity for an easy 
comparison of the characteristics of each narrative. 
Conspicuous among the characteristics in the Second 
Book is a display of rhetoric which is inconsistent 


with sober and careful narration. If one may judge 
from those passages which are undoubtedly from the 
epitomizer (ii. 19-32; xv. 38-39), this rhetorical effect 
is not attributable to Jason. The writer gives the 
impression of having worked up his material. Hence 
with a copiousness of detail, which sometimes help- 
fully supplements the narrative of the First Book, 
there is an exaggeration and often an inaccuracy 
which make the whole work inferior. No indisput- 
able date can be given for its origin ; it probably was 
written at some time in the last half of the second 
century B. c. Its chief value as a source of informa- 
tion to the historian is in those facts where it is not 
directly at variance with the First Book, and where 
additional and not improbable material makes more 
complete the picture of times or events. 

5. In the first six chapters of the first book of the 
Jewish War, Josephus gives a rapid review of the 
principal events of the Maccabean period. The whole 
book is simply an introduction to the account of the 
war against the Komans in A. D. 66-70, hence is 
comparatively meagre and sketchy as a history. In 
his Antiquities, he has given two entire books 
(xii., xiii.) to the time between the troubles under 
Antiochus Epiphanes and those under Pompey. 
This narrative is based upon various sources. For 
the period 175-135 B. c. he relies principally upon I. 
Maccabees, supplementing his material from Polybius 
and other general historical works of the Greeks. 
For the rest of the Maccabean period his chief author- 
ities are Strabo and Nicolas of Damascus, whose his- 
tories unfortunately are lost. He also uses Jewish 
oral tradition, but its contribution is of comparatively 


little value. Josephus shared, with many of his coun- 
trymen at home and abroad, the anxious desire to 
commend his nation to powerful and cultured for- 
eigners. The desire was both a stimulus and a 
temptation. It impelled him to write out in full the 
history of his people from the beginning; it led him 
to color fact with the light of romance, or modify it 
by adaptations which would harmonize it with Greek 
or Roman prejudices. This is noticeable, as far as the 
Maccabean period is concerned, in his account of the 
religious parties and in his silence about the Messianic 
hope, and these are but prominent instances of an 
unfaithfulness to fact, which appears whenever cir- 
cumstances tempted him to an emphatic expression 
of his desire. The Antiquities, however, will always 
continue to be the fullest record of Jewish history. 
It is unfortunate that his Jewish War has not 
given us a more detailed account of the times of the 
Maccabees, for this work as a history is superior to the 
Antiquities. Out of these three sources, I. Maccabees, 
the Antiquities, and the Jewish War, it is possible, 
however, with the help of the remarkable results of 
archaeological and geographical study, to make a clear, 
definite picture of a brilliant, heroic period of Jewish 

6. The spirit of that picture breathes in the litera- 
ture which was the outcome of the struggles and 
hopes of those days of unrest. Much of this literature 
is known only by name, but some great typical pro- 
ductions have been preserved. Among these stand 
pre-eminent, Daniel and the Book of Enoch. The 
question of the date of the Book of Daniel is beset 
with difficulties. That theory, however, of the time 


of its origin which covers the greatest number of facts 
involved has just claim to acceptance; hence the 
generally received view that it belongs in the second 
century before Christ rather than in the sixth. The 
point of view of the author; the way the history, in 
predictive form, becomes specific in its details as it 
approaches the times of persecution under Antiochus 
Epiphanes ; the theology of the book and its position in 
the latest group of the Hebrew canon, all bear witness 
to its later origin. It is the great prototype of that 
apocalyptic literature which, as best it could, was 
henceforth to play the prophet's part in comforting, 
inspiring, and guiding the nation. It is the model for 
all succeeding apocalypses. Antiochus is the little 
horn of the eighth chapter, and chapter xi. 21-45 
describes his reign. In those dark days, when the 
life of the nation was threatened, new inspiration to 
fidelity and new hope of triumph were brought to the 
brave struggling patriots by the heroic faithfulness of 
Daniel and the Hebrew children. God was "watch- 
ing above his own," and the days through which they 
were passing might issue in the glory of the Messianic 
Kingdom. This was the message of the Book of Daniel 
to the Maccabean leaders and their followers. From the 
first it seems to have been received with earnest wel- 
come. While, thus considered, the book contributes 
to our knowledge of the closing years of the Greek 
period, it is not necessary to conclude that its stories 
are entirely without basis in fact, and that Daniel is 
himself a myth. The stories are homilies rather than 
histories. They give us, in all probability, features of 
a traditional story of Daniel, moulded to the purpose of 
the author. Similarly the prophetic visions all quicken 


the expectation of the solution of the desperate troubles 
of the nation in the Messiah's coming. Courage and 
hope are the watchwords of the book. The probable 
date is not earlier than 167 b. c, and not later than 
the beginning of 165 B. c. 

7. The Book of Enoch is a representative of a volumi- 
nous literature now lost which once circulated under 
the name of this ancient saint. From the fact that 
the book in its component parts reflects the thoughts 
and hopes of different periods from 170 B. c. to the 
early part of the first century before Christ, it be- 
comes a fruitful source of knowledge for the inner 
life of the nation. In the form of visions and predic- 
tions clothed in strange and often fantastic symbolism, 
it speaks its message of comfort and inspiration to the 
troubled yet valiant spirits of the Maccabean era. It 
aims, in common with all apocalyptic literature, to 
show that despite the suffering and distress of the 
faithful, God's righteousness shall yet be vindicated. 
Hence it sketches in outline and under peculiar 
imagery the history of mankind, and in its prophecy 
of the future, opens up not only the issues of the 
Messiah's advent, but the destinies of eternity. The 
book is rich in doctrinal teaching regarding Messianic 
times and the future life. Of the five parts into 
which the whole may be divided, that including chap- 
ters lxxxiii. to xc. resembles the apocalypse of Daniel 
in its point of view, while the portion xxxvii. to lxxii., 
containing the Similitudes, is perhaps the most impor- 
tant of all. Its exalted conceptions of the Messiah and 
of the Messianic kingdom are unique. The respec- 
tive dates of these two sections are probably about 
165 b. c, and some time between 94 and 64 B. c. It 


was no obstacle to the power and influence of these 
prophecies that they came under an assumed name. 
Their quickening hopes nerved men both to dare and 
to endure. 

8. While Judaism in Palestine was thus summon- 
ing her defenders to fidelity, and in the visions of 
the prophet enlarging and defining her hopes for the 
future, Alexandrian Judaism was engaged in earn- 
estly commending her faith to the Gentiles. Along 
lines that converge in the work and word of the 
Master, each was preparing the world for the fulness 
of times. In Egypt, the reflective rather than the 
martial mood predominates, and the literature which 
we know, either through the testimony of others, or 
through actual possession of it, glorifies the beliefs and 
hopes of "the chosen people." The fragments of 
Aristobulus preserved by Eusebius show the begin- 
nings of the philosophic harmonization of the con- 
ceptions of the Jew with the thoughts of the Greek, 
which, despite all its concessions and adaptations, 
yet saved the essentials of the Jewish faith, and pre- 
pared the way for a really higher and more spiritual 
presentation of them in later times. If in the exag- 
geration of Jewish pride Moses was made by Aris- 
tobulus and other Jewish philosophers to be the 
teacher of the Greeks, it was because they believed 
he had some great truths to teach which could not 
be gained elsewhere. Out of all the moulding and 
remoulding of religious conceptions, which the con- 
tact of revelation and philosophy in Alexandria thus 
brought about, came some products which appear in 
our New Testament. 

9. At the same time, when this method of extol- 


ling and interpreting the law was in progress, voices 
were heard commending to the thoughtful among the 
heathen the worth and beauty of Wisdom. A fine 
specimen of this Alexandrian teaching is given us in 
the Wisdom of Solomon, whose exact date is uncer- 
tain. The two limits within which it must be placed 
are the date of the translation of the Septuagint on 
the one side, and the age of Philo on the other. If 
the allusion to present sufferings and chastisement in 
xii. 22-23 is to the persecutions under Ptolemy VII., 
the date can be determined a little more definitely and 
may have been about 140 B. c. It is not important, 
however, to know the exact date. Its deep interest 
as a source for this period of Alexandrian Judaism is 
in its revelation of the noble spirit which confronted 
the idolatry and corruption of Egypt, in its clear 
insight into the necessity and worth of the essentials 
of righteousness, and in its exalted view of the divine 
aspect of Wisdom. The influences of the Greek sur- 
roundings of its author are traceable in the book, but 
he, nevertheless, occupies the point of view of ortho- 
dox Judaism. " The stuff is still Hebrew, but shot, 
as it were, with hues reflecting the light of western 
speculation. " The work may be conveniently divided 
into two great parts, — chapters i. to ix., and x. to 
xix. The latter is devoted to the historic illustration 
of the principles and injunctions set forth in the first 
half of the work. In accord with the custom of the 
time, the whole is attributed, with obvious fitness, to 

10. If the names of Hebrew prophets and sages 
could be used to commend Jewish teaching to heathen 
readers, it was an easy advance to the belief that a 


suitable name from heathenism itself might even more 
successfully win attention. Hence the Sibylline Ora- 
cles. The sibyl in the ancient world was an embodi- 
ment of prophetic power; the one who declared the 
will of the gods concerning the fate of cities and king- 
doms. The number of these sibyls varied at different 
times, but there were at least three of wide renown. 
Written records of their oracles were in circulation 
and were held in the highest esteem. Therefore, as 
Schurer remarks, "it was a happy hit when Jewish 
propaganda took possession of this form to turn it into 
account for its own purposes." The use of it began 
in Alexandria in the second century b. c, and proved 
so serviceable that the early Christian Church con- 
tinued it in her own interests. Of the large collec- 
tion of these oracles, Jewish and Christian, which has 
been preserved, the third book is of especial interest 
to the student of the Maccabean period. It originated 
probably about 140 B. c. With the exception of lines 
1-96, which are out of place, the remainder of the 
book, in apocalyptic style, sketches the history of the 
world to the time of the Romans, and then, in lines 
162-195, passes over into prophecy concerning the 
future of Israel and the blessings of Messianic times 
(652-817). Interspersed through various parts of the 
whole are the announcements of judgments and calam- 
ities upon various heathen nations (295-333, 381- 
572). In view of the solemn issues which she thus 
foretells, the Sibyl appeals to all mortals to abandon 
idolatry and to worship the one true God. When the 
happy time should come in which the glorious hopes 
of Judaism should be realized, he who had been faith- 
ful to the God of Israel should enter into all the 


promised blessedness. The Sibyl's message was not 
in vain. Never had she spoken with greater solem- 
nity, nor with richer consolation, and her words reached 
many to whom the Wisdom of Solomon, or the philoso- 
phizings of Aristobulus, w ) lid be unknown. 




11. The Maccabean period of Jewish history is in 
reality the period of the intense struggle for suprem- 
acy of two spiritual forces, — Hellenism and Judaism. 
About this issue centred leaders, parties, battles, and 
all changes in government, society, and religion. It 
is significant, therefore, that the First Book of Mac* 
cabees, our best source of knowledge regarding these 
troublous times, begins its narrative with the sketch 
of the career of Alexander the Great, passing thence 
to Antiochus Epiphanes, the other great champion of 
Hellenism and the, sworn foe of Judaism. These two 
names, as far as Judea was concerned, represent that 
long process of development which reached its culmi- 
nation in the days of Judas Maccabeus. Every 
school-boy is familiar with the picture of Alexander 
weeping for more worlds to conquer. His genius as 
a soldier has rightly won admiration; but the great- 
ness of the man is more clearly seen in the exalted 
ambition which he set bef re himself of carrying 
Greek culture into all lanr 1 ^ he could subdue. He 
sought that fusion of nationalities which should be 
expressed not only in unity of government, but also 
in unity of language, customs, and civilization. He 
followed up his conquests by colonization, and when 


he died, his successors carried out his purpose until 
all about the eastern Mediterranean Hellenistic influ- 
ences were dominant. Schurer reminds us of the 
difference between Hellenic and Hellenistic culture, 
— the latter being more complex and comprehensive in 
that it took to itself the "available elements of all 
foreign cultures;' 1 but it never lost the prevailing 
impress of the Greek mind. Its very comprehensive- 
ness helped on its advance. It had much to offer, 
especially to those who were, for any reason, aside 
from the great currents of the world's life; but it also 
made imperious claims, being satisfied with nothing 
less than the adaptation of religion itself to its own 
modes of thought. 

12. This force which had powerfully affected the 
Jews in Egypt had established itself along the coast 
and all about the northern and eastern sides of Pales- 
tine. Indeed, it was asserting itself in Jerusalem, 
and had not Antiochus Epiphanes forced an issue, it 
might there also have ultimately moulded all forms of 
life. To what extent it had already prevailed may be 
seen in the fact that Jason, the leader of the Hellen- 
ists, had persuaded Antiochus by large gifts to depose 
Onias III. and to give to him the office of high-priest 
with the right to erect a gymnasium in Jerusalem. 
This he did, and not only did the young men show 
their fondness for this Grecian privilege, but the priests 
themselves, "neglecting the sacrifices, hastened to be 
partakers in the unlawful representation in the palaes- 
tra" (II. Mac. iv. 7-15; I. Mac. i. 13-14). Naturally 
they were ashamed of the indubitable mark of their 
nationality when they appeared in the arena, and con- 
sequently they sought to efface all traces of circumci- 


sion (I. Mac. i. 15). A spirit that could go bo far in 
" falling away from the holy covenant and yoking itself 
with the heathen " sought eagerly in every possible 
way to show its " broad-mindedness. " Jewish cos- 
tumes and names were exchanged for Greek, and 
many, that they might enjoy in full measure these 
foreign privileges, had themselves enrolled as "citi- 
zens of Antioch" (II. Mac. iv. 9). Along this way of 
apostasy was the possibility of wealth and political 
preferment; hence with ambitions for power which 
would use for its own purposes the highest sacred 
offices; with wealth and social prestige, which were 
made the means of realizing these ambitions, and 
with promises and pleasures that were unquestion- 
ably attractive, Hellenism sought for the mastery of 

13. Over against it stood the firm, uncompromising 
spirit of Judaism, whose reverence for the law was its 
distinguishing mark. When the exile was over, and 
amid the holy associations of Jerusalem the national 
life and worship began anew, there were no more 
temptations to the idolatry of the olden days. " Sepa- 
ration from all that was heathen was from the time of 
Ezra and Nehemiah the very vital nerve of Jewish 
piety." That separation was secured by the law. 
There was no concern of life too small to elude its 
direction. By its precepts and their careful applica- 
tion, the way to holiness was made plain and explicit. 
The whole trend of the development was toward the 
outward and the formal. It begat a new idolatry, — 
that of the letter and of mechanical observance. But 
it held the people to an unbounded zeal for that 
"which had been delivered to them by Moses" and 


expanded by the teachers of these later days. The 
scribes were the representative leaders of the nation. 
Schools for the instruction of the young were estab- 
lished in Jerusalem and elsewhere, and he alone 
was accounted "learned " who had at command, not 
only the great teachings of the Mosaic law itself, but 
also the mass of explanations and decisions that 
through the years had accumulated in the teachings 
of the scribes. Men would die rather than violate 
the commands of the law (I. Mac. ii. 34). 

14. All this fidelity and scrupulousness were counted 
as commendable in the sight of heaven. Pride kept 
pace with fidelity. The severity of their demands 
became an inspiration to hold fast to the traditions, 
and to glorify the power that produced them. Politi- 
cal ambitions were, to those who kept alive this zeal, 
entirely subordinate to the one main purpose of life, 
the maintenance of religious ideals. Piety, defined by 
such interpretations as were making it increasingly a 
matter of definite routine, was the most vital concern. 
With the progress of Hellenization, advanced this 
Puritanic, legalistic spirit, which could in later days 
declare that " the law must be fulfilled even if Israel 
be ruined by it." Around the temple worship in 
Jerusalem and in the synagogues the land over, Juda- 
ism fed its hopes, cherished its ideals, and strengthened 
its resistance, as far as it could, against all external 
influences seeking to mould or to destroy the faith 
which was its peculiar glory. In all the complex and 
often tragic history which lies before us, these two 
underlying, antagonistic forces — Hellenism and Jew- 
ish legalism — are constantly at work. They are the 
real causes of all the perplexing complications which 



the historian of the two centuries of Jewish history 
before Christ's coming must set forth. 

15. At the close of the Greek Period (175-165 b. c. ; 
see Kent, History Jewish People, Vol. III.), Antiochus 
Epiphanes was on the throne of Syria. His training 
while a hostage for fourteen years in Rome, his reck- 
less, passionate nature, and his determined espousal of 
everything Greek made him from the first a man to be 
feared. His ambition to Hellenize his whole kingdom 
met with the hearty support of the Greek party in 
Judea. Jason, the leader of this party, and the 
brother of the faithful high-priest Onias III., asked for 
the high-priest's office, and with the help of a goodly 
sum of gold obtained it (II. Mac. iv. 7-10). It was 
a position of great power for good or for evil, for since 
the days of Ezra it had grown in importance, becom- 
ing political as well as religious in character. The 
high-priest was virtually the head of the nation. He 
was the representative of the old order and in the 
normal progress of .affairs held his office for life. 
Jason wished the place in order to gratify personal 
ambitions and to carry out the schemes of the party 
which he represented, for "he forthwith led his 
fellow-countrymen over to the Greek fashion " (II. 
Mac. iv. 10). Jerusalem for the first time saw the 
strange doings of the gymnasium, and was called upon 
to send money to the sacrificial festival of Hercules at 
Tyre. All this pleased Antiochus, and the process of 
Hellenization must have seemed to him to be making 
most satisfactory progress, when upon the occasion of 
a visit shortly afterward to Jerusalem he was escorted 
into the city " with torchlights and with great shout- 
ings " (II. Mac. iv. 22). 


16. In 171 b. c. came Jason's turn to be set aside. 
A certain Menelaus whom Jason had sent to Antioch 
on business at court, offered the king three hundred 
talents more than Jason was giving, and was conse- 
quently appointed high-priest. The statement that 
he brought to it nothing worthy the high- priesthood 
(II. Mac. iv. 25) is hardly necessary, for it is easily 
read in the career whose very beginning gave promise 
of all its treachery and baseness. Most of the people 
took the side of Jason (Ant. xii. 5, 1); but without 
success. He was driven into exile, and Menelaus 
turned his attention to getting the money which he 
had promised Antiochus. He had, however, bar- 
gained for too large a sum. He could not procure it 
by the usual method of taxation, and so helped 
himself from the temple treasures. There was no 
quicker way to arouse the passion of the people. 
Onias III. rebuked the dastardly act and paid for his 
fidelity with his life, or, as Wellhausen, distrusting 
the story in II. Maccabees, maintains, fled to Egypt 
(see J. W. i. 1). The people killed Lysimachus, 
the agent of Menelaus, near the treasury, and sent a 
deputation to Antiochus to prefer charges against the 
unprincipled high -priest. The latter, though con- 
victed, saved himself by bribery, and secured the 
death of his accusers (II. Mac. iv. 42-47). The out- 
look for those who loved the law was dark indeed. 
Menelaus was more than ever the ready and effective 
tool of Antiochus. 

17. In 172 b. c. Ptolemy VI. claimed Coele-Syria 
and Palestine as the dowry of his mother, Cleopatra, 
and when Epiphanes refused to give it up, invaded 
Syrian territory. This act resulted in a war between 


Antiochus and his nephews. Our interest centres in 
the second Egyptian campaign made in 170 b. c, for 
the report of the king's death in Egypt led the exiled 
Jason to try and put himself again into the high- 
priest's office. He suddenly appeared at Jerusalem, 
captured the city, and shut up Menelaus in the cita- 
del. It was, however, a short-lived victory, for Jason 
"slew" his own citizens without mercy, not thinking 
that "good success against kinsmen is the greatest 
ill success " (II. Mac. v. 6). He was obliged to go 
again into exile, where he died with none to mourn 
for him. His desperate deed, however, was fraught 
with fearful consequences to Jerusalem. Antiochus 
looked upon it as a revolt of Judea and "in furious 
mind " sought vengeance. The record in I. Maccabees 
i. 24, describes his conduct by the two words, " defile- 
ment" and "insolence," but the account in II. Mac- 
cabees does not seem exaggerated in declaring that 
men, women, and children were killed in wholesale 
fashion and thousands were sold into slavery. Nor 
was this all. Guided by Menelaus, the king insolently 
entered the temple, plundered its enormous treasures, 
and carried away to Antioch its valuable articles of 
furniture. Philip, a Phrygian, and a man more de- 
testable, if possible, than Antiochus himself, was left 
in command of the city. 

18. The worst was yet to come. In 168 B. c. 
Antiochus made another expedition to Egypt. He 
had in former campaigns been sufficiently successful 
to warrant him in believing that he could now make 
Egypt his own; but Rome had listened to the request 
of the Ptolemies for help, and a Roman envoy deliv- 
ered to Antiochus a written order from the senate to 


discontinue the war. Antiochus asked for time to 
consult with his friends before giving his answer. 
Popilius, the Roman legate, drew a circle in the sand 
with his staff round the Syrian king and said : " Before 
you step out of that circle you must decide." There 
was no alternative, and the schemes of Antiochus in 
Egypt were forever ended. 

19. Frustrated and embittered, he again made the 
Jews the victims of his revenge. Josephus tells us 
(Ant. xii. 5, 4; Against Ap. ii. 7) that the reason of 
his attack upon Jerusalem was his need of money. 
Unquestionably this was so in part, but it was not the 
chief reason. The resistance of many to his heatheniz- 
ing schemes kept alive his malignant hatred, and he 
now resolved that this determined " superstition " 
should be rooted out (I. Mac. i. 41). There must be 
no more observance of the Sabbath, no more offering 
of sacrifices to Jehovah, no more practising of the rite 
of circumcision. Every trace of Jewish worship and 
ceremonial must be done away with. Nor was the 
change to be merely negative. All Jews must adopt 
heathen practices (II. Mac. vi. 7, 9), and any one 
found with the book of the law in his possession was 
to be put to death (I. Mac. i. 41-50). As a program 
offering unlimited opportunity for terrible work in its 
execution, it was worthy of the ruler who made it. 

20. At the head of an army of twenty-two thou- 
sand men, Apollonius, the Syrian general, came to 
Jerusalem. He professed peace, but waiting for a 
Sabbath in order to take the Jews unprepared, he 
began a merciless slaughter (II. Mac. v. 25, 26). 
The temple was dismantled and laid waste, and, that 
his revenues might be increased, women and children 


were sold into slavery. The walls of the city were 
pulled down, and many houses looted and set on fire 
(I. Mac. i. 31, 32, 39; Ant. xii. 5, 4). All who could 
make their escape fled either to Egypt or to hiding- 
places in Judea, and strangers were brought in who 
would be in sympathy with Menelaus and the Syrians. 
Only one place was built up, — the citadel on A era. 
This stronghold gave command of the temple enclosure 
and was for twenty -seven years a constant menace to 
the city until its capture by the Hasmonean Simon, 
in 141 b. c. 

21. But the deepest insults of this awful time were 
worked out upon the temple mount. In December, 
168 b. c, a pagan altar was built upon the site of the 
great altar of burnt offering, and dedicated to the 
Olympian Zeus. Soldiers and harlots revelled in 
the temple courts, and into them swine were driven 
and sacrificed and their polluting blood sprinkled 
upon the most holy places (II. Mac. vi. 2-4; Ant. 
xii. 5, 4). The people were compelled to take part in 
these heathen sacrifices, and overseers were appointed 
to make sure that the same conformity in worship 
existed in all parts of the land (I. Mac. i. 51). As 
many copies of the law or of other sacred writings as 
the soldiers could lay hands on were destroyed. Death 
was the certain penalty to any one who persisted in 
following the commands of the Jewish law. The 
only alternatives were conformity to pagan customs, 
or extermination. Menelaus had no small part in 
bringing all this about (Ant. xii. 9, 7). With the 
city in full possession of the Syrians and the Jews 
who followed him ; with the faithful scattered into all 
parts of the land, he could congratulate Antiochus 


on the successful issue of his work. It is not surpris- 
ing that many Jews gave their allegiance in full to the 
heathen cult (I. Mac. i. 52). It was a day of sifting, 
but it was also a day of awakening. The mask of 
Hellenism was off. Its " broad-minded " culture was 
at heart false and really godless. With all that it had 
to offer in the way of material enlargement, its very 
atmosphere was filled with the miasma of moral death 
and corruption. So, at least, thought that band of 
faithful souls who, in the hiding-places of the moun- 
tains and desert, strengthened their zeal for the law 
and solemnly determined to die rather than renounce 
their faith (I. Mac. i. 62-64). In the destruction of 
their sacred books the Jews realized anew the priceless 
value of them all, and in this realization may be dated 
the impulse to add to the existing canon of the Law 
and the Prophets the third group of writings now in* 
icluded in our Old Testament. 

22. Naturally such opposition kindled the hot anger 
of Antiochus. He resorted to all the devices which 
cruelty could invent to force his will upon the Jews. 
Josephus tells us (Ant. xii. 5, 4), that men were 
"whipped with rods, their limbs torn to pieces, and 
that they were fixed to crosses while alive and breath- 
ing; " and, as an example of what it would mean to 
defy the command forbidding circumcision, "certain 
women who had caused their children to be circum- 
cised were paraded around the streets of Jerusalem, 
with their babes hanging at their breasts, and then 
thrown from a high wall and killed " (I. Mac. i. 60, 
61 ; II. Mac. vi. 10). To this time also belong those 
stories told in the Second Book of Maccabees, which, 
whether true or not in all their details, reflect the 


merciless spirit of the Hellenists. One is of Eleazar, 
the aged scribe, who refused to eat swine's flesh, and 
when urged to dissemble by buying flesh of his own 
procuring and substituting it for the sacrificial meat, 
declared that he must "leave a noble example to 
such as be young to die willingly and courageously 
for the honorable and holy laws," and then went un- 
flinchingly to torture (II. Mac. vi. 18-31). The 
second story is of a mother and her seven sons, who 
died one after another under most excruciating suffer- 
ing, which, in each case, seemed only to nerve the 
soul to heroic steadfastness of faith. It was with 
such spirits that Antiochus had now to deal. For 
a little while they waited as if stunned by the awful 
blow which had fallen upon the city and the temple. 
They even submitted at first to the cowardly artifice 
of the Syrians in taking the Sabbath to attack them 
(Ant. xii. 6, 2), and perished one thousand of them 
without resistance. Desperate, however, as it seemed, 
and contrary as it was to the long habit of submis- 
sion, there was no other way of escaping a shameless 
and cruel death than to take the sword and look to 
the God of battles for success. But who should lead 

23. Among the limestone hills of Judea, about 
twenty miles northwest of Jerusalem, lay the little 
town of Modein on a hill-slope one mile north from the 
old road which led from the capital to Lydda, by the 
stony way of Beth-horon. It was a place of no beauty 
in itself, but it commanded a wide prospect over the 
plain of Sharon and the "Great Sea." In this retired 
spot Mattathias, an aged priest of the order of Joarib, 
had his hereditary estates, and when the troubles 


began at Jerusalem, he, with his five sons, retired 
thither mourning the terrible profanation of the holy 
city and temple and firm in their conviction that " it 
were better for them to die for the laws of their coun- 
try than to live so ingloriously " as the conditions 
in Jerusalem demanded (I. Mac. ii. 1-14; Ant. xii. 
6, 1). They had not been long in Modem when the 
officials of Antiochus appeared to carry out his will 
regarding heathen sacrifices. In the company that 
hastily gathered about the officers were Mattathias 
and his sons. An appeal was made to the venerable 
priest, as a man of influence, to set the example of 
compliance with the king's command. "You and 
your house shall then be in the number of the king's 
friends, and you and your children shall be honored 
with silver and gold and many gifts " (I. Mac. ii. 
15-18). Many times had that promise been effective. 
"The king's friends," after this sort, were even then 
dwelling in Jerusalem and Samaria and throughout 
the land. Well the people knew what was involved 
in refusing this proffered friendship, but "he who had 
rent his clothes and put on sackcloth " because of the 
shame of Jerusalem had no ear for the temptations 
of an abhorred Hellenism. "If all the nations that 
are under the king's dominions obey him and fall 
away every one from the worship of their fathers, and 
give consent to his commandments ; yet will I and my 
sons and my brethren walk in the covenant of our 
fathers. God forbid that we should forsake the law 
and the ordinances. We will not hearken to the 
king's words to go aside from our worship either to the 
right hand or to the left " (I. Mac. ii. 19-22). He 
had hardly ceased speaking when a Jew, either to 


assert his Hellenizing sympathy, or to save the village 
from the wrath of the Syrians, stepped forward to 
make the detested sacrifice. Mattathias, in the fury 
of his indignation, was on the man in an instant and 
killed him. Then he turned upon the king's commis- 
sioner and, ere this man could defend himself, struck 
him down beside the altar, which was immediately 
pulled to pieces (I. Mac. ii. 24-26). 

24. The deed of Mattathias was virtually the call to 
war. It was the uplifting of the standard of Judaism. 
In an unpremeditated moment one of the noblest and 
bravest struggles in all history for religious freedom 
had begun. Calling to all who were zealous for the 
law and the covenant to follow him, Mattathias and 
his sons fled across the central mountain ridge to the 
wilderness of Bethaven, above the Jordan valley. In 
this wild region they hid themselves in caves. The 
news of the bold deed at Modein found its way 
rapidly among the villages, and many "who sought 
after justice and judgment " deserted their homes, and 
hastily driving their cattle before them, also sought 
refuge in the wilderness (I. Mac. ii. 27-30). An army 
hastily sent out from Jerusalem was at first successful 
because of the unwillingness of the Jews to defend 
themselves on the Sabbath. Mattathias and his fol- 
lowers with greater wisdom determined to place ne- 
cessity above even the rigid law governing the holy 
day, and agreed to fight whenever attacked (I. Mac. 
ii. 30-41). 

25. With each fresh determination to resist, the 
zeal for the law seems to have been quickened. Rec- 
ognizing in Mattathias a leader who had the courage 
of his convictions, the people gathered about him and 


joined in an aggressive guerilla warfare, easily possible 
in the mountainous country about them. They made 
rapid descents upon the villages, not only pulling 
down the heathen altars, but also putting to death 
all apostate Jews whom they captured, and compelling 
the circumcision of all children in the households of 
these apostates. At times they were able to put to 
flight a company of Syrians. Success gave them hope 
and such confidence that they could boast that they 
"recovered the law out of the hand of the Gentiles 
and out of the hand of kings, and suffered not the 
sinner to triumph; " that is, they protected those who 
wished to observe the law and stood effectually in the 
way of the progress of Hellenizing influences. 

26. Among those who rallied to the support of Mat- 
tathias was "a company of Hasideans." The name 
is of more than passing interest, for it marks, at an 
earlier stage, that line of development which cul- 
minated in the Pharisees of later days, — the line of 
legalistic precision and exaction. We have already 
seen that the law was the sum and substance of post- 
exilic Judaism. The measure of one's earnestness in 
seeking to know and obey it was also the measure 
of his worth and honor among the people ; and so the 
scribe became the man of authority and power. Zeal- 
ous always for the maintenance of that which to him 
was so vital, he became doubly alert when the seductive 
influences of Hellenism were threatening to sap the very 
life of the nation. It was probably under the stress of 
the days of the madness of Antiochus that this party 
of " the pious " was formed. Its formation was an 
added emphasis upon that necessity of separation 
which was called for by fidelity to the law. Alas for 


this whole trend in Israel's life! It made the em- 
phasis more and more explicit until the outcome was 
the burdens and the bitterness of the Pharisaism of 
New Testament times. Whether or not Mattathias 
belonged to this new party is uncertain. He certainly 
expressed its spirit in his brave speech in Modein, 
and his whole conduct, as far as it can be studied, 
reveals that wisdom and strength which made him such 
a leader as these devoted patriots needed. The acces- 
sion of the Hasideans brought the venerable priest- 
captain great strength and inspiration. The rebellion 
had now assumed proportions which required constant 
watchfulness and care. The leadership proved too 
much for the aged Mattathias. In 167 B. c. he died, 
after having served " the cause of the law " about a 
year, "and all Israel made great lamentation for him " 
(I. Mac. ii. 70). He was buried in Modein. 





27. "If it was a piece of higher good fortune that 
the insurrection broke out undesignedly and was set 
on foot by a holy man of such blameless character, it 
was no less so that on his death he left behind him a 
heroic band of five sons, who all shared his principles 
and were ready to carry on the contest without an 
instant's delay " (Ewald). These five sons, John, 
Simon, Judas, Eleazar, and Jonathan, were known as 
the "Maccabees," from the surname of Judas, who 
was called Maccabeus, that is, "the hammerer," — 
though this interpretation, as well as every other, has 
been questioned, — and as the " Hasmoneans " from 
Hasmon, their grandfather. These Mattathias gath- 
ered about him just before his death, and in words which 
are outlined for us in I. Maccabees ii. 49-69, urged 
upon them courageous fidelity to the law. Simon, the 
second-born, because of his wisdom was commended 
by the father to the position of chief, and Judas, the 
third son, was named as their general. It is a 
notable characteristic of these five men that without 
jealousy they threw themselves into the earnest work 
committed to their hands. Judas at once assumed 
command and proved himself one of the greatest war- 


riors ever known in Israel. In him the spirit of a 
Joshua lived again. He was, indeed, a "warrior of 
God." His exalted enthusiasm, sagacious methods, 
and vigorous, decisive action soon inspired his small 
army, enabling it to win victories which are little short 
of marvellous. 

28. At first Judas followed the policy which his 
father had adopted. Making sudden sallies upon the 
outlying villages, or attacking them at night, he car- 
ried on a destructive, terrifying warfare. As Judea 
belonged under the supervision of Apollonius, the 
governor of Samaria, he advanced against Judas, 
who, watching his opportunity, fell upon the advanc- 
ing force of Syrians and defeated them. Apollonius 
was slain and the sword of the Syrian general taken 
by Judas for his own use (I. Mac. iii. 10-12; Ant. 
xii. 7, 1). The news of the defeat soon found its 
way to the north, and Seron, the commander of the 
province of Coele -Syria, determined to put down the 
rebellion. In full confidence of an easy victory, Seron 
moved southward with a large army, and was met by 
Judas at Beth-horon, — a rough pass near Modein, 
leading from the plain to the central ridge, — and 
hopelessly defeated. As the Jews looked down upon 
the large force coming up toward them, the odds 
against them seemed too great, and they were anxious 
to withdraw. By a speech whose few sentences (see 
I. Mac. iii. 18-22) reveal the sure faith of Judas, 
the little army was inspirited, and with an impetuosity 
which carried all before it, the battle began. Seron 
fell, and, in the flight down into the plain, eight hun- 
dred of his troops. The rest escaped to the land of 
the Philistines (I. Mac. iii. 23, 24). Two such vie- 


tories made the name of Judas famous and gave 
Antiochus reason for much uneasiness. 

29. The Syrian king now determined that the Jews 
should be rooted out and Jerusalem utterly destroyed ; 
but he himself could not go into Judea, for his treasury 
was empty, and money he must have, both to keep up 
his lavish giving and to pay his troops. He, accord- 
ingly, set out upon a predatory expedition against 
Parthia, and committed the task of punishing the Jews 
to Lysias, his governor-general, and the guardian of his 
son (I. Mac. iii. 31-33). To guard against any possi- 
bility of failure, great preparations were made against 
the small, resolute army of Judas. Forty thousand 
footmen and seven thousand horse were placed under 
the command of three experienced generals, — Ptolemy, 
Nicanor, and Gorgias. This force, with a detachment 
of elephants, made its way down the plain of Sharon, 
and turning up to the hills, encamped at Emmaus, 
about twenty miles northwest of Jerusalem. On this 
same route Richard Coeur de Lion long afterward led 
the English in their advance from Acre to Jerusalem. 
Judas gathered his forces at Mizpeh, sacred to the 
memory of Samuel's mighty intercession for Israel 
against the Philistines (I. Sam. vii. 5-13). From the 
summit of this mountain one has a wide outlook 
over the Judean hills, Jerusalem being easily visible. 
With humiliation and fasting, the people brought be- 
fore the Lord the signs of their extremity, — the 
scroll of the law, the garments of the priests, the first 
fruits, the tithes, and the uncompleted vows of the 
Nazarites. These all spoke of the desolated temple 
and emphasized the cry for help which came from 
anxious but faithful hearts. Judas then organized 


them for attack, dismissing those who in strict accord- 
ance with Mosaic requirements were excusable (Deut. 
xx. 6-9), for it was a time to be faithful in every 
particular if they would gain divine favor. 

30. Gorgias, intending to surprise the Jews, marched 
up from Emmaus toward Mizpeh at night, only to find 
that Judas had disappeared. This disappearance he 
interpreted as flight ; but, in reality, it was part of a 
clever scheme of Judas to mislead the Syrian; for 
on learning that Gorgias had divided his forces, Judas 
descended from Mizpeh to the hills south of Emmaus. 
This he did in order to fall suddenly upon the Syrian 
camp, hoping, if successful, to surprise Gorgias upon 
his return from Mizpeh. To nerve his soldiers to one 
of their impetuous onslaughts, Judas delivered to 
them a noble address (I. Mac. iv. 8-11), and then 
commanded them to charge. For a moment the 
Syrians wavered, then turned and fled toward the 
plain. The Jews followed in hot pursuit as far south 
as Azotus, slaying 'three thousand of the enemy. The 
camp with all its spoil fell into the hands of the 
needy troops, who would immediately have given 
themselves up to the enjoyment of all that they had 
gained had not Judas, returning from pursuit, given 
them timely warning regarding the division commanded 
by Gorgias. Even while he was speaking the Syrians 
appeared on the heights above, and dismayed at see- 
ing their camp in possession of the Jews, became 
panic-stricken and fled. The victory was compara- 
tively easy, and the men of Judas were greatly en- 
riched by it, for much gold and silver and silk, besides 
weapons and supplies of food, came to them. One of 
the sources of wealth was the company of Phoenician 





« 5 12 




slave-traders who had followed the Syrian army intend- 
ing to buy Jewish captives at a fixed price, so sure 
had Gorgias and Nicanor been of success. 

31. The great victory of Emmaus was secured in 
166 B. c. In the following autumn of 165 Lysias him- 
self took the field with an army of sixty thousand foot 
soldiers and five thousand horse, — large enough seem- 
ingly to annihilate the small force with Judas; but 
the Syrians were forced to fight in a mountainous 
couDtry against picked men, who were inspired by a 
common zeal and ready to die rather than to yield. 
This time the foreign army was taken farther south, 
in order to avoid the dangerous approaches to the 
western passes, and was led up on the central ridge 
from the southwest. Judas had •selected his position 
at Bethsur, about four miles north of Hebron. " The 
water-shed is lowest at this point, and a narrow pass 
leads by a beautiful spring under the rocky scarp 
where Bethsur then stood, west of the road, while to 
the east a rounded hill rises above a low cliff towards 
the mountain village of Halhull." It was a strategic 
situation, and the confidence of the Judeans in their 
leader made them eager for fight. With a prayer for 
God's favor Judas led them into battle, and again the 
Syrians were routed, leaving five thousand of their 
number on the field. Lysias was satisfied that he had 
inadequate forces and hastily withdrew to Antioch in 
order to make greater preparation against his cour- 
ageous foe (I. Mac. iv. 28-35 ; II. Mac. xi. 1-12). 

32. A decided change of spirit now came to the 
Jews as the result of these victories. Hitherto they 
had defended themselves; now they were ready to 
move forward in their own interests. They were not 



yet strong enough to drive out the Syrian garrison in 
Jerusalem, but they could purify the temple and set 
up once more the true worship of Jehovah. When 
Judas made the proposal to undertake this, it met with 
hearty and unanimous approval (I. Mac. iv. 36, 37; 
Ant. xii. 7, 6). The victorious little army marched 
from the camp at Bethsur to Jerusalem. Here a sorry 
sight met their eyes. The gates to the temple en- 
closure had been burned and through the blackened 
openings could be seen the weeds which covered the 
deserted area; while here and there heaps of stones 
from the broken walls and the demolished chambers of 
the priests completed the picture of desolation. In 
humiliation and grief the people cast themselves on 
their faces and "cried toward heaven" (I. Mac. iv. 
37-40). Stationing a guard to protect himself against 
incursions from the citadel, Judas set about the cleans- 
ing of the sacred enclosure, selecting " priests of blame- 
less life " for the holy work. The stones of the pol- 
luted altar of burnt offerings were pulled down and 
put carefully aside " until there should come a prophet 
to give an answer concerning them " (I. Mac. iv. 42- 
46) ; and everything that had defilement in it was car- 
ried away. A new altar was constructed, the broken 
walls were repaired, and new vessels were provided 
for the holy places. At last, in the month of Decem- 
ber, 165 b. c, just three years after the first sacrifice 
had been offered to Olympian Zeus, " sacrifice accord- 
ing to the law was offered upon the new altar of burnt 
offerings," and the hills about resounded with the 
praises of a happy, grateful people. Eight days were 
kept as a glad festival much after the manner of the 
Feast of Tabernacles, and the time was fixed for 


yearly remembrance, — to be known as the Feast of 
Dedication, and afterward as the Feast of Lights 
(I. Mac. v. 47-59; II. Mac. x. 1-8). 

33. Judaism, realizing afresh its worth and power, 
rejoiced in the evident favor of God, and strengthened 
itself against that compromise with Hellenism which 
had thus far brought upon the nation pitiful disaster. 
As showing a quickened sense of the worth of those 
sacred writings which Antiochus had attempted to 
completely destroy (sect. 21), the tradition imbedded 
in II. Mac. ii. 14 is worthy of notice : " And in like 
manner Judas also gathered together for us all those 
writings that had been scattered by reason of the war 
that befell; and they are still with us." This tradition 
is found, indeed, in a spurious letter, but its only 
error may be in attributing to Judas what may have 
been undertaken soon after his death. All through the 
account of the temple's restoration are hints of the 
care with which all taints of Hellenistic heresy were 
kept away from the sacred undertaking. The way of 
the law, beset with hardships and difficulties as it had 
been, was the only way of blessing. To protect the 
reconsecrated enclosure, Judas built about it walls 
with strong towers, in which he placed guards. That 
he might have defence against further attacks from 
the south and southwest, he fortified Bethsur. 

34. The days of rejoicing in Jerusalem proved but 
a brief respite from the stern experiences of war. All 
about the little province of Judea were neighbors 
whose usual hostility was but quickened by the resto- 
ration of the temple services. Judas was now, for a 
time, engaged in what was really a foreign campaign. 
Proceeding southward, he met the Idumeans at "the 


Scorpion pass," just southwest of the Dead Sea, and 
"gave them a great overthrow." He then turned his 
attention to the "Sons of Baean," a company of brig- 
ands on the southern border, and punished them 
severely. Hastening thence across the Jordan, he 
called the Ammonites to account, and, though they 
had gathered a large force under Timotheus, a cer- 
tain Syrian officer, he defeated them repeatedly, and, 
having taken the town of Jazer, returned to Judea 
(I. Mac. v. 1-7). He had no sooner reached Jerusa- 
lem than tidings came to him of an attack upon the 
Jews in Gilead, which news was followed by a mes- 
sage of a like attack upon his countrymen in Galilee. 
It was an anxious time for all Jews dwelling in 
heathen territory, and Judas felt that quick, decisive 
measures must be taken or many thousands would be 
put to death. Indeed, many had already perished. A 
council was called and the following plan adopted: 
Simon, the brother of Judas, was to lead three thou- 
sand men into Galilee; Judas and Jonathan eight 
thousand into Gilead, while Joseph and Azarias, cap- 
tains of the people, with a third force, were to guard 
Judea, and to make no war against outside peoples 
during the absence of Judas. The fifth chapter of the 
First Book of Maccabees is given up to the record of 
these expeditions. 

35. Simon, after several victories, chased the enemy 
to the gates of Ptolemais and then returned to Judea, 
bringing with him the Galilean Jews and their posses- 
sions. As another has well said, "it was no trifling 
enterprise on which Judas embarked." His march 
involved the crossing of the Jordan cleft, an advance 
through a hostile land with no regular base of sup- 


plies, and strenuous efforts to reach the widely sepa- 
rated points of need. It was all accomplished with 
the same dash and vigor that characterized his exploits 
in Judea. A friendly tribe of Nabateans, falling in 
with him on the third day's journey from the Jordan, 
reported the desperate situation in Bozrah. This city, 
located sixty miles east of the Jordan and on the old 
road from Damascus to Moab, was reached by a forced 
march, captured and completely destroyed. " Nor did 
he stop even when night came on, but pushed on to 
the garrison where the Jews happened to be invested 
and where Timotheus was besieging the place with 
his army " (Ant. xii. 8, 3). This was the Dathema of 
I. Maccabees v. 9. Judas arrived just as an assault 
was being made and prepared at once to relieve the 
besieged; but the name of "Maccabeus " was enough. 
Hearing it, the besiegers fled and suffered great loss. 
The towns Alema, Casphor, Maked, Bosor, as well as 
others, whose sites at present are uncertain, fell before 
the triumphing progress of the Jewish forces. The 
whole campaign was a brilliant success. 

36. For the same reason that Simon removed the 
Jews from Galilee, Judas gathered together all Ms 
people in Gilead and took them with him to Judea. 
They were no longer safe in these outlying pagan dis- 
tricts. While he was returning with these refugees, a 
town by the name of Ephron refused him a peaceable 
passage through its streets. At once commands were 
given to halt and prepare for attack. The next day 
the host marched through the street of the town step- 
ping over the dead bodies of its inhabitants (I. Mac. 
v. 9-54). It is not strange that "they came into 
Judea singing psalms and hymns as they went and 


indulging in such tokens of mirth as are usual in tri- 
umphs ' : (Ant. xii. 8, 6). On his return, Judas 
learned that one part of his plan had failed through 
the vainglorious ambition of Joseph and Azarias. 
Wishing to make for themselves a name, they led an 
attack upon Jamnia and were defeated with consider- 
able loss by Gorgias, who, since the battle at Emmaus, 
had remained in the land of the Philistines. The 
writer of the First Book of Maccabees sees in this 
defeat the just reward for presumption which sought 
to take out of the hands of the Maccabees, the chosen 
of God, the work of delivering the people (I. Mac. v. 
62). The real presumption in it was the attempt to 
meet a general of no mean ability in open field. Judas 
himself would never have attempted that. Botl suc- 
cesses, therefore, and defeat gave glory to the Macca- 
bean name, so that " the man Judas and his brethren 
were greatly renowned in the sight of all Israel and 
of all the heathen wheresoever their name was heard " 


(I. Mac. v. 63). If the details in II. Maccabees xii. 
32-37, are trustworthy, Judas set out once more against 
Idumea, probably to get satisfaction from Gorgias, the 
commander of this region, for his victory at Jamnia. 
He seized Hebron, demolished its fortifications, and 
nearly secured Gorgias himself, who, just escaping 
capture, fled to Mareshah (II. Mac. xii. 35). Judas 
hastened after him, and by taking Mareshah, became 
master of the rich, surrounding district including 
Adullam and the valley of Elah. Passing on down 
into the Philistine plain, he fell upon Azotus, the 
ancient Ashdod, and left its idol temple and altar in 
smoking ruins (I. Mac. v. 68). 

37. Judas was now at the height of his power. 


His name was respected at Antioch and feared in 
all the regions around Judea. By the genius of his 
leadership the temple worship had been re-established, 
the nation inspired, and bright hopes for the future of 
Judaism enkindled. Suddenly the news came that 
Antiochus Epiphanes had died while on his expedition 
in the far East. The question as to what this might 
mean to Judea could only be answered as further 
developments at the Syrian court should show with 
whom Judas had to deal. The tidings were certainly 
of the deepest interest to all whom this arch-despot 
and madman had oppressed. No better evidence of 
this interest can be found than in the different inter- 
pretations of his death. Polybius thinks it was a 
judgment upon him for attempting to plunder the 
temple of Artemis, — the last act of his infamous life 
(Polyb. xxxi. 2). Josephus scouts this idea, declaring 
it was rather because of his sacrilegious plundering 
of the temple in Jerusalem (Ant. xii. 9, 1). Unques- 
tionably the bitter experiences of his own failure and 
the like experiences of his generals in Judea, helped 
on the painful illness which terminated his life at Taba 
in 164 b. c. 

38. Upon his death-bed Antiochus appointed Philip, 
one of his generals, regent in his empire and guar- 
dian of his son (I. Mac. vi. 1-15). It will be remem- 
bered that Lysias had been given virtually the same 
position, when Antiochus set out upon his eastern 
expedition (sect. 29). Trouble was inevitable, such 
trouble as would prove fatal to the strength of the 
Seleucid kingdom. Lysias began the assertion of 
his rights by having the young prince crowned as 
Antiochus Eupator (I. Mac. vi. 17). At the same 


time, Demetrius, the son of Seleucus Philopator, 
brother of Antiochus Epiphanes, was in Rome, where 
he had been for years a hostage, begging the Romans 
to recognize his claims to the Syrian throne. In the 
double rivalry which these names — Philip, Lysias, 
Eupator, Demetrius — represent, " the last convulsions 
of the kingdom, which for one hundred and fifty years 
before had been so powerful, had now begun. In the 
collapse of the edifice of monarchy, the nation, small 
though it might be, within the compass of the realm, 
which had risen up with so much energy in the days 
of its strength against its arbitrary and pernicious 
power, might well secure a fragment of its broad lands 
to rear upon it a new state, if it only comprehended 
in time how to re-establish and maintain the spoils of 
its freedom " (Ewald). 

39. To the keen eye of Judas the critical situation 
of affairs in Syria was clear enough. Now was his 
time to advance. The citadel in Jerusalem — that 
Hellenistic stronghold in the very centre of Judaism 
— must be captured. Since the rehabilitation of the 
temple this citadel had been peculiarly troublesome. 
Many had been killed on their way into the temple to 
offer sacrifice by sudden sallies therefrom, and it was 
always a menace to the temple itself (Ant. xii. 9, 3 ; 
I. Mac. vi. 18). Judas set himself resolutely to the 
formidable task, and there seems to have been good 
promise of success, when some of the apostates, escap- 
ing from the fortress by night, hurried to the king 
with a cry for help. They based their claim to succor 
on the fact that they had "left the religious worship 
of their fathers and adopted that which Antiochus 
Epiphanes had commanded them to follow " (Ant. xii. 


9, 3). Lysias seems now to have realized the real 
strength of his foe, for an army of one hundred thou- 
sand footmen and twenty thousand horsemen, together 
with a detachment of thirty-two elephants trained for 
war, was made ready to go to Judea. Accompanied 
by the young king, Lysias led these forces down the 
eastern coast and, ascending from the southwest, again 
took his position at Bethsur, laying siege to the place 
for many days (I. Mac. vi. 28-31). The Jewish gar- 
rison fought bravely, but the overwhelming force was 
more than a match for their fierce righting, and 
Bethsur was soon invested. Lysias then pushed on 
northward nine miles to Bethzachariah, where Judas, 
having raised the siege of the citadel of Jerusalem, 
had placed his camp. This spot, identified with the 
modern Beit-Sakariyeh, commanded all the approaches 
from the east, west, and south toward Jerusalem. " It 
was the last natural line of defence south of the city 
and one which could neither be outflanked or masked, 
but which must be attacked and won before any 
advance could be made " (Conder). The imposing 
advance of the great army arranged in singular fashion 
about the elephants as centres, deeply moved the Jews 
(I. Mac. vi. 32-41) ; but they had faced a Syrian army 
too often to be daunted by mere appearances, and in 
the first attack which Judas made, six hundred of the 
king's men were slain. Eleazar, the brother of Judas, 
thinking he had discovered the elephant on which the 
young king was riding, fought his way single-handed 
to the beast, crept under it, and inflicting a fatal stab, 
was himself crushed by the animal's fall. But the 
utmost bravery and daring were in vain. The odds 
were too great, and Judas was forced to retreat, or, 


as the record in First Maccabees mildly puts it, 
shrinking from the statement of this bitter reverse, 
"turned away from them." 

40. At some time in the midst of these struggles 
appeared that proclamation to the faithful which forms 
the second part of the Book of Enoch, chapters lxxxiii. 
to xc. In two visions — one of a great world-judg- 
ment (lxxxiii. to lxxxiv.), and another of the history of 
the world until the final judgment (lxxxv. to xc.) — 
the seer discovers the causes and issues of the calam- 
ities that have come upon Israel. By means of apoca- 
lyptic symbolism, — made familiar by the Book of 
Daniel, which book was itself a constant inspiration 
to these struggling patriots, — man's history is pic- 
tured under the forms and deeds of animals, and in- 
terest is centred upon that part of the unfolding story 
where " small lambs were born from the white sheep " 
(xc. 6), — that is, where those who loved the law took 
firm stand against the Hellenizing aims of many of 
the leaders in Israel. The coming of the Syrians, the 
uprising of the faithful, the prowess of Judas are all 
successively symbolized ; and then, as showing that the 
writer knew nothing of the death of Judas, the vision 
become. prophetic and depicts the intervention of God 
himself, who will uphold Judas against all his enemies, 
terribly punish all sinners, set up the New Jerusalem, 
bring back the dispersed, raise the righteous dead, and 
lead forth the Messiah (xc. 15-39). This inspiring 
prophecy gives us the earliest unquestioned refer- 
ence to the Messiah to be found in apocalyptic litera- 
ture. He does not, however, transcend the human, 
but is gifted with that perfection and power that 
entitle him to supremacy. Upon these hopes the 


brave supporters of Judas sustained themselves and 
fought on. 

41. Lysias now marched unhindered to Jerusalem, 
relieved the citadel, and laid siege to the temple en- 
closure. As soon as the defeat of Judas at Bethzacha- 
riah was accomplished, Bethsur capitulated, and the 
citizens were set free on parole. It was a dark hour 
for Judaism. Its brave struggles seemed now des- 
tined to utter failure. Added to the presence of the 
heathen army in the land was a scarcity of supplies, 
for it was a Sabbatic year, in which no grain had been 
sown, and the influx of Jews from Galilee and Gilead 
only gave pressure to the need. Many of the be- 
sieged deserted, and the bitter end seemed near at 
hand. But by one of those changes which confirm 
believing men in their faith in an overruling Provi- 
dence, the whole situation was suddenly changed. As 
if God would say to his people, " Your trust shall not 
be in princes, nor in brave leaders, but in me," the 
issue was made to depend, not upon the sagacity of 
Judas, nor upon the bravery of his soldiers, but upon 
the rivalry in the court of Antioch. Forces far away 
from Jerusalem were again being used to turn the 
scales and place upon the side of Judea that religious 
freedom for which she had, indeed, nobly struggled. 

42. While he was before the walls of the temple area, 
news came to Lysias that Philip, with the army of Anti- 
ochus Epiphanes, was marching to Antioch " to assume 
the government " (I. Mac. vi. 56}, in accordance with 
the dying wishes of the king. Lysias, unwilling to give 
up the honor he was holding, determined to return at 
once to Antioch. In order to get away, he offered 
the Jews peace, guaranteeing them, if they would 


surrender, the liberty " to make use of and live accord- 
ing to the laws of their fathers " (Ant. xii. 9, 7), and 
the preservation of the temple walls. The Jews gladly 
accepted these terms and evacuated the temple ; Lysias, 
after violating the second provision of his guarantee, 
since he found the temple securely fortified, marched 
away, and with his withdrawal the first chapter of the 
history of the Maccabean struggle comes to a close. 
Never after this, until A. D. 70, did the continuance of 
the temple worship again become a critical question. 

43. Henceforth there was to be no attempt at forc- 
ing Hellenism upon the Jews. The struggle between 
it and Judaism was to go on, but the basis of conten- 
tion was shifted. It now appeared more prominently 
within the nation itself. Up to this point all within 
the lines of the national party were satisfied with the 
outcome of the rebellion, as far as religious questions 
were concerned. The vital requirement was religious 
freedom. Conscience had triumphed. 



44. " The year 162 b. c. marks the proper end of 
the religious war of the Jews. Thereafter conflict was 
primarily not concerning religion, but government. ,, 
Such is the text which the strife of parties, the appeals 
for foreign support, the intervention of heathen rulers, 
and the constant unrest within the borders of Judea 
must now help us to interpret. The removal of the 
Sjaian army left the two great parties, the Hellenistic 
and the National, face to face, with all their old differ- 
ences intensified and with vital questions to settle. 
The first of these questions was regarding the high- 
priesthood. When the king set out for Antioch, 
Lysias persuaded him to take with him Menelaus the 
high-priest. He thus aimed to provide against future 
disturbances among the Jews, for this Menelaus had 
been the originator of all the mischief which had re- 
quired armies for its undoing. Antiochus V., thor- 
oughly distrusting the man, sent him into exile, and 
soon after caused him to be put to death (Ant. xii. 9, 
7). Alcimus, a man of Aaronic descent, but a leader 
in the Hellenistic party, was appointed to his place. 
With Judas at the head of affairs in Jerusalem, he 
soon found that he had a title without an office, and 
retired to Antioch to await further developments. 
Judas himself, while making no claim to the high- 


priesthood, was, if we may trust Josephus (Ant. xii. 
11, 2), at this time performing its duties, and he would 
have no such polluted hands as those of Alcimus minis- 
tering at the altar. 

45. Meanwhile startling changes had been in pro- 
gress in the Syrian court. Antiochus and Lysias were 
successful in their contest with Philip, but soon after 
the latter's death the fatal hour came to the young 
king and his general. Demetrius, eluding the vigi- 
lance of the Romans, made his escape from Italy and 
landed at Tripolis on the Phoenician coast (II. Mac. 
xiv. 1). He at once announced his purpose of becom- 
ing king, and receiving the support of the Syrian army, 
which soon after his arrival declared in his favor, he 
" entered into the palace of his ancestors " (I. Mac. vii. 
1, 2). Antiochus and Lysias were put to death. 

46. Before this new king appeared Alcimus and the 
company of apostates who had gathered about him in 
Antioch. They made it appear that Judas and his 
brethren had not only been oppressors of many who 
like themselves had been driven out of the country, 
but also that he had been guilty of treason toward the 
king in putting to death those who would have been 
his supporters. Demetrius listened readily to their 
complaints. He confirmed the appointment of Alci- 
mus and delegated Bacchides, one of his generals, to 
see that Alcimus was installed in office, and that the 
enemies of the king were punished. Once more the 
clouds of war gathered in the Judean sky. The ap- 
pearance of Alcimus at Jerusalem brings to light the 
first trace of that attitude of the Hasideans which after- 
ward became pronounced and pernicious in the policy 
of the Pharisees. It is difficult to understand how 


many of them could have listened to the fair words of 
Alcimus and thus have been led to accept him, unless 
it was that their satisfaction with the religious freedom 
which had been given them put the matter of govern- 
ment in another light, and caused them to hesitate 
about renouncing a legitimate successor to the office 
of high-priest. At any rate, they paid dearly for their 
want of caution, for sixty of them, probably picked 
men, were at once put to death in direct violation of 
promises of protection. Josephus makes Bacchides 
the perpetrator of this bloody deed (Ant. xii. 10, 2). 
The truth of the matter probably is that both he and 
Alcimus were equally concerned in it. This shameful 
and malignant treachery struck fear and trembling into 
the hearts of the people, and turned their anxious 
faces once more to Judas as their leader and protector 
(I. Mac. vii. 8, 18). 

47. Bacchides, leaving behind him a force sufficient 
to support Alcimus, now returned to Syria. He halted 
long enough at Bezeth, probably the modern Bezetha, 
to seize the deserters and those who had harbored 
the fugitives and put them to death, and then he left 
the country to the embittered will of Alcimus (I. Mac. 
vii. 19, 20). As the latter could not put foot inside 
the temple enclosure, he was virtually only a civil ruler 
in the land, and accordingly he devoted himself to 
making his high-priesthood a reality. He ingratiated 
himself with all kinds of people by kindly words and 
agreeable manners until he had gathered a considerable 
army of supporters, whom Josephus characterizes for 
the most part as " wicked and deserters " (Ant. xii. 
10, 3). With these he travelled up and down the 
land, murdering and destroying whenever he could 


lay hands upon sympathizers with Judas. In the mean 
time Judas himself was not idle, and Alcimus soon dis- 
covered that he was steadily losing in a kind of con- 
test in which his opponents were more skilled than 
himself. Matters had come to such a pass that Alci- 
mus and his men dared not show themselves openly, 
and there was nothing left for him to do but to appeal 
to the king (I. Mac. vii. 21-25). He went himself to 
Antioch and so " exasperated " Demetrius against 
Judas, that Nicanor, a man with a spirit suited to his 
mission, for " he bare deadly hate unto Israel " (I. Mac. 
vii. 26), was sent with a large force to Jerusalem. 

48. In the Second Book of Maccabees there is a 
curious tradition of the personal love and admiration 
of Nicanor for Judas. He could not bear to have 
Judas out of his sight, entreating him to marry and 
give up his unsettled life. The tradition goes so far 
as to say that Judas actually did this, and that Nicanor 
had determined that Judas should be the successor of 
Demetrius (see xiv. 22-26). The whole account is so 
extravagant that it stultifies itself. The sober, dis- 
passionate recital of the First Book gives us the real 
progress of events. Nicanor did try to win his way at 
first by treacherous friendliness, but failed through the 
keenness and prudence of Judas. His only remaining 
resource was battle, and the engagement took place at 
Capharsalama. The site of this ancient village is un- 
certain, but it was probably near the borders of Samaria, 
in the plain below Modein. Nicanor was defeated and 
fell back upon Jerusalem, where he could have the 
further support of the garrison in the citadel. As he 
crossed from the citadel to the temple, priests went out 
to greet him and tell him of the sacrifice which, as 


obedient subjects of the king, they had offered for 
Demetrius ; but the defeated Nicanor was in no mood 
to receive them. He ridiculed their sacred duties and 
threatened to destroy the temple if they did not deliver 
up to him Judas and his men (I. Mac. vii. 27-35). This 
idle threat sent the priests back into the temple to 
weep and pray that the Lord would cause this blas- 
phemer to perish. 

49. Their prayer was soon answered. Nicanor 
marched northwest to Beth-horon to wait there for 
reinforcements from Syria. Judas took his position at 
Adasa, about four miles north of Jerusalem, and at the 
point on the plateau where the roads from the north 
and from Beth-horon come together. Like that of 
Bethzacharias, the place could not be easily outflankeu, 
and proved a fine vantage-ground. Judas had three 
thousand (Josephus says one thousand), and Nicanor 
nine thousand. The disparity in numbers was such as 
had more than once only nerved the Jews to fight 
with more determined bravery. On the morning of the 
thirteenth of Adar, 161 B. a, Nicanor advanced and 
the hosts joined battle. Tradition has sought to 
glorify the splendid victory which Judas gained by 
accounts of visions which came to him before the 
battle. He is said to have seen the noble high-priest, 
Onias III., holding up his hands in prayer for the 
nation, and, as he prayed, there stood beside him a 
majestic, hoary-headed figure, Jeremias, the prophet of 
God. He held in his right hand a sword of gold which 
he gave to Judas, declaring that therewith he should 
wound his enemies (II. Mac. xv. 12, 16). In the 
early part of the battle Nicanor was killed, and before 
the fierce onslaught of the Jews the Syrians gave way 


and fled. As the soldiers of Judas hurried after them, 
they sounded an alarm with their trumpets to call the 
villagers in the hill-country to help in cutting off the 
retreat. All the way from Adasa down across the val- 
ley of Ajalon to the fortress of Gazara, the dead of the 
Syrian army lay scattered on the hillsides. It was an 
overpowering victory remembered ever after by an 
annual festival on " Nicanor's Day " (I. Mac. vii. 44- 
46). The taint of savagery which is revealed in the 
order of Judas to cut off the head and right hand of 
the Syrian general and to carry them to Jerusalem to 
give emphasis to his defiance of the citadel is quite in 
accord with the spirit of the times (II. Mac. xv. 31, 32), 
though for us it casts a shadow over the noble figure 
of Judas. It certainly was a ghastly object-lesson to 
his enemies. 

50. Once more for a little while the land of Judea 
had rest. Judas was master of the situation. Could 
he remain so ? That question now took precedence of 
all others in his thoughts. Only political independ- 
ence could guarantee and make available to the fullest 
degree the religious liberty which had been acquired. 
There was no hope of peace from the Syrian throne. 
Nicanor's punishment would bring another army upon 
them, and they had already experienced their terrible 
weakness when Syria really put forth her full 
strength. There was one power whose fame was 
already known among the Judean hills, — that of 
Rome. Already it had proved more than a match for 
the power of Syria in the famous battle of Magnesia, 
190 B. c, and ever since had kept a watchful eye 
upon the doings of the Syrian kings. If Judas knew 
much about the court at Antioch, he knew that more 


than once it had been compelled to change its policy 
at command from Rome. There was no real friendship 
between the two kingdoms. Demetrius himself had 
run away from Italy, and though he afterward gained 
recognition from the Romans as king, yet they were 
ready to cripple his power especially by such means 
as were offered through division of interests or alli- 
ance with subordinate peoples. All circumstances were 
favorable for an appeal to the great western power for 
help. Could Judas have foreseen what this appeal 
would ultimately mean to Israel, as a prophet of old 
he would have lifted up his own voice against it. 
Alas ! he never dreamed of the coming degeneracy of 
his own family and of those internal dissensions which 
should bring the Roman governors and procurators into 
closest relations with the destiny of the nation. 

51. Soon after the battle of Adasa, Judas sent two 
men, Eupolemus and Jason, as ambassadors to the 
Roman Senate, with instructions to make a league of 
" amity and confederacy " which would take from them 
the Syrian yoke (I. Mac. viii. 17-18). The Senate 
gave them a cordial reception and sent them back with 
a treaty inscribed on tablets of bronze the principal 
provisions of which were that the Jews should give 
help to the Romans and the Romans to the Jews, in 
times of war. A close inspection of these terms brings 
out the fact that the Romans were practically left to 
act according to their own pleasure. Indeed, the 
course of events will show us that the Romans did not 
help the Jews forward on the way to political inde- 
pendence so much by direct assistance as by their 
interference with the kingdom of Syria. As soon as 
the treaty was concluded, word was sent from Rome 


to Demetrius to stop his maltreatment of Judea, and 
this word was accompanied by a threat that further 
complaint against him would bring down upon him the 
combined forces of the Roman power (I. Mac. viii. 
31, 32). Such seem to be the facts in this disputed 
chapter. Inaccuracies, such as are usual in this book 
when explaining foreign relations, and details of infor- 
mation, which were known to the author rather than 
to Judas, have cast suspicion upon the present position 
of the chapter in the book. There is, however, ade- 
quate reason for the acceptance of the fact of the treaty 

52. It was a long journey from Jerusalem to Rome 
and return. Before the tidings of the alliance had 
reached either Antioch or Judea sad changes had come 
to the Jews. The defeat of Nicanor aroused Demetrius 
to a more determined effort to punish Judas. Bac- 
chides was ordered to proceed against the rebels with an 
army of twenty thousand foot and two thousand horse. 
The repeated appearance of large armies began to wear 
upon the spirit of the Jews. The Hasideans also had 
their ardor cooled by the purely political nature of the 
struggle, and Judas found difficulty in keeping about 
him a sufficient force to offer any effective resistance 
(I. Mac. ix. 6). The few men who remained faithful 
tried in vain to dissuade him from battle. He would 
not stain his honor nor theirs by flight, and though 
the little band of eight hundred men fought desper- 
ately all day and won some successes, the issue was as 
had been feared. Not only were the Jews completely 
defeated, but Judas himself was killed (I. Mac. ix. 
7-18). Under a flag of truce his dead body was re- 
covered from the enemy and carried to the village of 


Modein for burial. Thus perished at Eleasa one of 
the bravest, most devoted spirits that the world has 
seen. From the day that Mattathias called him to 
stand with him for the law, he toiled, suffered, and 
fought for the sacred cause.' He saved the nation from 
destruction and wrested from the strong hand of Syria 
the priceless boon of religious freedom. His death was 
the crowning sorrow of those few years which had 
brought mourning into many a Jewish home, and 
throughout the land there was for him great lamenta- 
tion (I. Mac. ix. 19, 20). 

53. The calamitous battle of Eleasa (Il'asa, near 
Beth-horon) was fought in 161 B. c. For seven years 
thereafter persecution kept up its deadly work. Alci- 
mus, who had come with Bacchides from Antioch, 
was given full power as high-priest, which meant that 
the Hellenists were to have complete freedom of 
action. With what zeal they exercised their new 
authority may be learned from the brief statements 
in the First Book of Maccabees, where it is recorded 
that Bacchides chose " the ungodly men," that is, men 
of Hellenistic sympathies, and made them lords of the 
country. These then made inquiry and search for 
Judas' friends, and brought them to Bacchides, who 
took vengeance upon them and used them despitefully 
(I. Mac. ix. 25, 26). To the horrors of persecution 
was added the scourge of famine, until the afflictions 
of the faithful seemed unparalleled. Instinctively 
they turned to the family of the Hasmoneans for lead- 
ership, and selected Jonathan to be their "ruler and 
captain " (I. Mac. ix. 28-31). He was a different 
type of man from his brother Judas. It is question- 
able how far he could have succeeded had it not been 


for the differences among the Syrians themselves. He 
was crafty and diplomatic. His successes were those 
of a politician rather than of a warrior, though he did 
not and could not escape the disagreeable duties of war. 
54. Bacchides was particularly anxious to get hold 
of every member of the noted family of Mattathias and 
at once directed his energies toward securing Jonathan. 
The latter fled into the wilderness of Tekoa, sev- 
eral miles southeast of Bethlehem, and made his en- 
campment about a reservoir which Josephus names 
Asphar (Ant. xiii. 1, 2). In order to be free from 
the impedimenta of his army, he sent them under the 
care of his brother John to the Nabatheans across the 
Jordan. The camp-train was attacked by a tribe from 
near Medeba, and John was killed. To avenge this, 
Jonathan availed himself of the opportunity afforded 
by a great wedding feast in this same tribe. Coming 
suddenly upon the joyous procession, he put as many 
to death as were unable to escape into the mountains. 
It was on the return from this expedition that he first 
met Bacchides, who was waiting for him on the eastern 
bank of the Jordan. Ignoring the fact that it was the 
Sabbath day, and realizing the desperate situation in 
which he was placed, Jonathan advanced to the attack, 
and after driving back the Syrians with considerable 
loss, escaped with his followers hy swimming the 
Jordan (I. Mac. ix. 33-49). Bacchides now changed 
his policy. Instead of chasing a band of outlaws 
among the mountains and into the desert, he deter- 
mined to cover the land with secure fortifications, 
whence sallies could be safely made against the Jews, 
and to take the sons of the principal Jews as hostages 
and shut them up in the citadel in Jerusalem. Into 


such strongholds he converted Jericho, Emmaus 
(Am was), Beth-horon, Bethel, Timnath (Tibnath), 
Pharathoni (Ferata?), Tephon (Teffeh), Bethsur, 
Tekoa, and Gazara. As far as these can be with cer- 
tainty identified, they were frontier towns and consti- 
tuted a strong line of defence. 

55. Bacchides, by this one move, accomplished more 
than all his predecessors, and the Hellenists were free 
to act as they desired. Alcimus was at the head of 
the nation, and the chief interest of Demetrius was to 
secure the regular payment of tribute. At this time 
Alcimus began alterations in the temple which sent a 
wave of indignation over the land. He took down 
"the wall of the inner court," and thereby effaced the 
line of demarcation between the " sacred enclosure 
adjacent to the temple and the outer court into which 
Gentiles had been always admitted." There was to be 
no longer any separation between Jew and Gentile in 
the worship of the temple. To a people whose chief 
glory was their separateness from the nations, such an 
act was climacteric in its effrontery. It was but natural 
that the death of the high-priest, which soon followed, 
was interpreted as Heaven's own judgment on his 
wickedness. The high-priest's office was now vacant 
and remained so until Jonathan himself — strange re- 
versal! — was appointed to it by Demetrius in the 
year 153 b. c. With the land in comparative quiet 
and with no high-priest to support, Bacchides felt him- 
self under no necessity to remain in Judea, and so re- 
turned to Antioch. For two years the land had rest. 
The followers of Jonathan were doubtless kept away 
from the cultivated country, but were not subject to 
any more direct form of persecution. 


56. That Jonathan was not idle during this time is 
clear from the episode recorded in I. Maccabees ix., — 
the only bit of history which this book has saved re- 
specting the years 160-153 B. c. We have no details 
of the method by which the two brothers raised again 
the spirits and hopes of the national party; but the 
absence of an active Syrian force, and diligent effort 
on the part of those whose fidelity to the law was un- 
swerving, brought increasing strength to Jonathan's 
standard. It is also not unlikely that this enlarging 
power was used to harass the Hellenists both in Jeru- 
salem and elsewhere. At any rate, they saw with 
apprehension the changing situation and secretly laid 
a plan before Bacchides by which he could get posses- 
sion of Jonathan and Simon and put an end to the 
movement which they represented. Bacchides agreed 
to the plan and marched with a large force into Judea ; 
but the attainment of success was not so easy as it had 
been made to appear. The Syrian general seems to 
have expected the Hellenists in Judea to capture Jona- 
than for him, and because they could not, he quietly 
put fifty of their leaders to death. Jonathan, mean- 
while, kept thoroughly informed by means of spies and 
deserters, fortified himself at Bethbasi (probably Beth- 
hogla at the northern end of the Dead Sea), and was 
so successful in circumventing the Syrians that Bac- 
chides, in anger, once more resorted to massacring 
those who had misled him, and then resolved to raise 
the siege and go home. His disappointment and cha- 
grin made opportunity for the crafty Jonathan to offer 
solace and at the same time to further his own inter- 
ests. He proposed to Bacchides a dignified way of 
getting out of an unfortunate venture ; namely, a 


friendly alliance for each other's good. Bacchides ac- 
cepted the proposal gladly, and after an exchange of 
prisoners, left the land forever (I. Mac. ix. 58-72). 

57. A new order of progress now began in Judea. 
Jonathan had promised to make no war against Syria, 
and the Syrians yet remained in the citadel of Jeru- 
salem, and in the strongholds on the frontier. At 
Jerusalem the Hellenistic party was in control. Jona- 
than, therefore, selected Michmash, about seven miles 
north of the capital, as the centre of the national party. 
It was a place of much historic interest to the Jews, 
but was chosen rather for its security than for past 
associations. In the years of rest that succeeded, the 
people had ample time to reflect upon the sufferings 
and limitations brought to them by the party which 
still held possession of Jerusalem. The constraint of 
a foreign power was removed, and once more the idea 
of a purified nation powerfully appealed to them. 
Jonathan, as fast as he gained strength, used it against 
the apostates (I. Mac. ix. 73), and thus gained com- 
pletely the sympathy of the zealous Hasideans. When 
the story again opens in the year 153 B. c, he appears 
as a leader recognized by the Syrian court, through 
whose troubles he was now destined to make unex- 
pected advancement. 


58. In Syria " an unparalleled comedy was to be 
played " in which Jonathan was called upon to take a 
prominent part. A young man from Smyrna, named 
Balas, of low birth, but with a startling resemblance 
to Antiochus Eupator, announced himself as also a 
son of Antiochus Epiphanes, and laid claim to the 
throne in Antioch. Attalus II., King of Pergamum, 
who gave to the young pretender the name of Alexan- 
der, Ptolemy Philometor of Egypt and Ariarathes V. 
of Cappadocia, supported his claim. He gained, 
besides, the recognition of Rome, which was ready at 
any moment to make trouble in Syria (Polyb. xxxiii. 
16). The time was ripe for a change in Syria itself, 
for Demetrius had become a miserable drunkard (Polyb. 
xxxiii. 14, sect. 1), and had alienated his own people 
by his sloth and his harsh, overbearing conduct. 
Accordingly, when Alexander arrived at Ptolemais, 
the soldiers gave the town into his hands, and the 
struggle for the throne began. Demetrius knew only 
too well the fighting strength of the Jews, and, in his 
alarm, one of his first projects was to make them 
his friends. He despatched ambassadors to Jonathan 
granting him the right to assemble troops and delivered 
into his hands the hostages which Bacchides had shut 
up in the citadel. Jonathan went to Jerusalem in- 


vested with full power, and improved his time in 
fortifying the city and the temple mount. With the 
exception of those in the citadel, and at Bethsur, all 
the defenders of the various fortresses fled to Antioch, 
and Jonathan's position was greatly strengthened (I. 
Mac. x. 3-14). This, however, was but the beginning 
of favors that came very near making Judea completely 
independent. Balas heard of the promises of Deme- 
trius and also of the quality of the Maccabeans, and, 
resolving that Demetrius should not outbid him, he 
sent messengers with a letter to Jonathan containing 
his appointment as high-priest and with a purple robe 
and a crown of gold, insignia of his future princely 
rank. Jonathan accepted them all, and at the Feast 
of Tabernacles in 153 B. c. put on, for the first time, 
the vestments of the high-priest (I. Mac. x. 15-21). He 
was now, indeed, prince of Judea. He had gained at 
one stroke, and with no effort on his part, what Judas 
had failed to attain after a long, brave struggle. He 
was not, however, as yet complete master of Judea. 
The citadel was still in the possession of his opponents, 
and the taxes had not been remitted. Nevertheless, if 
he could maintain himself, he had made a long advance 
toward independence. 

59. But the rivalry for Jewish favor was not yet at 
an end. Demetrius made one more effort, and in his 
promises included those terms which would have made 
Jonathan's independence unquestionable ; namely, re- 
lease from tribute, surrender of the citadel, enlarge- 
ment of territory, and endowment for the expenses of 
the temple service. These, together with other offers, 
splendid as they were, Jonathan and the people de- 
clined, because of deep distrust of Demetrius. It 


was well that they did, for, in the first battle between 
the two rivals, Demetrius was defeated and slain 
(I. Mac. x. 22-50). The Hellenists were now virtually 
silenced and the security of Jonathan's position was 
demonstrated by the course of the events which fol- 
lowed shortly afterward in Ptolemais. In 150 B. c, at 
the time of the wedding of Alexander and Cleopatra, 
the daughter of Ptolemy Philometor, who hoped to 
gain much by the alliance, Jonathan was a highly 
honored guest, being clothed in purple and made to 
sit beside the king. Some of the Greek party thought 
it a fit time, singularly enough, to make accusations 
against Jonathan. The king not only refused to listen, 
but also made it clear that no one to whom they might 
complain should favor them, so they fled from the 
city. Thereupon Alexander honored him with the 
titles of "General and Governor of a district," and 
Jonathan returned to Jerusalem to spend an undis- 
turbed year in establishing himself in his suddenly 
acquired powers. At the end of that time he was 
able, upon call, to place ten thousand well-equipped 
men in the field. 

60. All too soon the king, whose unrighteous claims 
Jonathan had supported, exhibited his real character. 
His incompetency, debauchery, and shamelessness made 
him detestable to a large number of his subjects. 
Hence, in 147 B. c. when Demetrius II. appeared on 
the Syrian coast, as a rival of the king, Jonathan 
found himself the only foreign supporter of the 
threatened Balas, and his fidelity involved him almost 
immediately in trouble. Apollonius, the governor of 
Coele-Syria, declared for Demetrius and was appointed 
general in command of the whole coast to the borders 


of Egypt. Taking up his position at Jamnia, he sent 
a pompous challenge to Jonathan to meet him in the 
plain. Jonathan accepted, took possession of Joppa, 
where Apollonius had placed a governor, and then 
marched directly southward, it seemed, into the trap 
which had been prepared for him, for one thousand 
men had been concealed to come up behind him as he 
moved southward, and cut off his retreat. The plan 
seemed well made and promised the Syrians a victory, 
but the Jewish troops were formed into a square, and 
all day long stoutly resisted attack. Toward evening, 
Simon, with a separate detachment kept aside for the 
purpose, fell upon the wearied troops of Apollonius 
and sent them flying in panic-stricken disorder to 
Azotus. Jonathan followed, set fire to Azotus and its 
heathen temple, and destroyed a large part of the Syrian 
force. This signal victory brought him not only much 
spoil, but also from the grateful Balas a golden brooch 
for fastening his cloak, and the Philistine city of Ekron 
with its territory as a source of revenue. 

61. Authorities differ as to the motive which led 
Ptolemy into Syria at this time. The author of First 
Maccabees declares that it was an ambitious design to 
get possession of Alexander's kingdom. Josephus, on 
the contrary, states that he made ready his land and 
sea forces to go to the help of Alexander. The truth 
of the matter is, in all probability, as Diodorus presents 
it, that upon starting he had an honest intention of 
helping his son-in-law, but upon learning the real state 
of affairs after his arrival in Syria, changed his mind. 
Whatever its motive, his defection proved fatal to 
Alexander, who, in the battle which was fought near 
Antioch, was defeated, and Ptolemy so severely 


wounded that lie shortly after died. Alexander ended 
his wretched career in Arabia by the hand of an as- 
sassin, and Demetrius II. became king in 145 B. c. 
(I. Mac. xi. 1-19). 

62. After his victory over Apollonius, Jonathan 
felt himself warranted in attempting the removal of 
that thorn in the flesh of Judaism, — the citadel in 
Jerusalem. Elaborate preparations were made, and 
an energetic siege begun, when reports concerning it 
were carried to Demetrius by "certain ungodly per- 
sons who hated their own nation." Ten years before 
this time the tidings would have been sufficient to 
have brought into Judea a formidable army. Now 
Jonathan was summoned to Ptolemais to explain his 
action. Without raising the siege, Jonathan obeyed, 
taking with him not only an embassy of elders and 
priests, but also a goodly supply of gifts. In some 
way the cunning leader won completely the good-will 
of Demetrius. He may have set before him the com- 
parative weakness of the Hellenistic party, and in ad- 
dition reminded him of the valuable services he had 
rendered his predecessors. At any rate, he came away 
with far more than the pardon of his offence. Deme- 
trius confirmed all the previous honors that had been 
given him, refused to listen to the charge of the Helle- 
nists, and, adding to Judea the three frontier districts 
of Samaria, — Ephraim, Lydda, and Ramathaim, — ex- 
empted both them and Judea from tribute. Jonathan 
promised in return three hundred talents (I. Mac. xi. 
22-28) and his friendship. In these successive trea- 
ties with Jonathan two facts stand out with increasing 
clearness, — the growing power of the Jewish state and 
the uncertain, tottering condition of the Seleucid 


dynasty. Both are needed to explain such concessions 
as these just made. Ewald sees in the specification 
in I. Maccabees xi. 34, "for all such as do sacrifice 
in Jerusalem," — a defining clause which really allowed 
the inhabitants of the fortresses to remain in them as 
before (v. 331). The clause seems rather to refer to 
exemption from taxes, but the distinction set forth 
might well carry with it the implication above given, 
and thus account for no express mention of the siege 
of Acra, the real occasion of the conference. 

63. Jonathan had not long to wait for an opportun- 
ity to give proof of his friendship. The army in such 
a kingdom as Syria was the sovereign's right arm, and 
short-sighted indeed was the ruler who, for the sake 
of personal indulgences, or for civic economy, weakened 
its power. Demetrius had aroused the ill-will of his 
troops, not only by his cruelty, but also by his refusal 
to pay them in times of peace, as commanders before 
him had done, and by his manifest preference for 
mercenaries. All this a certain Diodotus, surnamed 
Tryphon, a former general of Alexander and a traitor 
to him as well, reported to the guardian of Antiochus, 
the young son of Alexander, persuading him that 
he could make the boy king in place of Demetrius 
(I. Mac. xi. 38-40). While Tryphon was absent upon 
this mission, a popular uprising in Antioch, having 
its cause likewise in the hatred of the people for 
Demetrius, made the king a prisoner in his palace. 
The news of the growing discontent in the Syrian 
capital led Jonathan to suggest to Demetrius what 
might be for his advantage and certainly for the wel- 
fare of Israel; namely, the withdrawal of the garri- 
sons from all the fortresses in Judea. Demetrius was 


ready to make any promise, "for he lied in all that 
he spake " (I. Mac. xi. 53), if only Jonathan would 
help him. Three thousand troops were at once for- 
warded to Antioch and arrived just in time to de- 
fend the king against the rabble. They cleared the 
streets with terrible slaughter and compelled the 
inhabitants to beg for mercy. Demetrius was grate- 
ful, but his gratitude did not prevent him from shame- 
lessly repudiating all the promises he had made 
(I. Mac. xi. 41-53). 

64. On general principles any Syrian king in these 
times could ill afford to break faith with serviceable 
allies; but Demetrius little knew his own particular 
extremity. He had hardly settled down to enjoy 
the dearly bought tranquillity of his capital, when 
Tryphon appeared with Antiochus "who reigned 
and put on a diadem" (I. Mac. xi. 54). The discon- 
tented troop rallied to the new standard and the days 
of the kingship of Demetrius were soon numbered. 
In his first battle with Tryphon he was defeated, and 
Antioch passed into the hands of Antiochus. The 
young king confirmed Jonathan in his high -priesthood, 
as well as in the governorship of Judea, and of the 
new districts given him by Demetrius (sect. 62), and 
sent him royal presents which made full recognition 
of the dignity and value of his leadership. Simon, 
the elder brother, was made military commander of 
the king from the Ladder of Tyre down to the borders 
of Egypt. Jonathan espoused the cause of Antiochus 
with enthusiasm and set forth to bring all Palestine 
and Syria, as far as Damascus, under his control. The 
trans-Jordanic region yielded first, and then Jonathan 
turned to Philistia. Ascalon readily acknowledged 


the new king, but Gaza refused to do so, and made 
necessary a siege which soon brought the recalcitrant 
city to terms. Both cities were important additions to 
the Syrian alliance (I. Mac. xi. 55-62). By this time 
Demetrius had recovered from his first defeat, and his 
generals appeared in upper Galilee with a large army 
intending " to remove Jonathan from office." At first 
it seemed that they would be successful, for, by strat- 
egy at Hazor, west of Lake Merom, they hemmed the 
Jewish forces in between two fires, so that a large num- 
ber fled. The First Book of Maccabees states that 
Jonathan, Mattathias, the son of Absalom, and Judas, 
the son of Calphi, saved the day by withstanding the 
enemy (xi. 70). Even Josephus's estimate of fifty is 
an exaggeration of bravery, but brave the Jews cer- 
tainly were, who stood their ground and so turned the 
tide of battle that a decided victory was won and the 
Syrians pursued to Kadesh. Simon, in the mean time, 
was also successful in the siege of Bethsur in which 
he placed a Jewish garrison (I. Mac. xi. 63-74). 

65. Seemingly in order to gratify his own sense of 
leadership and to show to his friends and enemies alike 
his relationship to foreign powers, Jonathan now 
renewed his friendship with Rome. He sent ambassa- 
dors also to other places for the same purpose. No 
material aid was sought, but simply that confirmation 
of the good-will of earlier days that would dignify 
anew his rulership in Israel. A bit of Jewish pride is 
evident in the statement that " none of these things 
was needed " (I. Mac. xii. 9) on the part of Israel. It 
was only another way of expressing their feeling that 
they were a favored nation and that they conferred 
rather than received honor in entering upon such 


negotiations. Both Rome and Sparta responded cor- 
dially, especially the latter, in whose letter of greeting 
was the claim of brotherhood on the surprising ground 
of being also of the stock of Abraham (I. Mac. xii. 
21). It is interesting to note that Jonathan, as Judas 
had done in the case of the previous embassy, sent 
Jews with Greek names; and it is also remarkable 
that, like Judas, Jonathan did not live to see the return 
of the ambassadors. 

66. Once more Demetrius threatened the land with 
an invasion and Jonathan hastened northward in order 
to keep the war out of his own territory. The armies 
met at Hamath, in the valley of the Orontes, but there 
was no fighting, for, when the Syrians learned that 
their plan to make a night attack had been discovered 
and thwarted, they quietly withdrew under cover of 
their camp-fires. They could not be found, though 
Jonathan followed hard after them the next day, as far 
as the river Eleutherus, — an old boundary between 
Palestine and Syria 1 (Strabo xvi. 2, 12). Turning east- 
ward he first punished the Zabadeans, a robber tribe 
in the Arabian desert, then passed by the way of 
Damascus southward to Jerusalem. While Jonathan 
was in the north, Simon had looked after the fortresses 
in the south. In addition to placing strong garrisons 
at Ascalon and Joppa, he erected a new stronghold at 
Adida on the edge of the Shephelah hills, west of 
Lydda. There was little fear after these preparations 
that Demetrius could reach Jerusalem from the sea 
(I. Mac, xii. 24-34). 

67. The time had now come to think again of Jeru- 
salem itself. Through all these years of power and 
expansion the hated citadel had not yet been subdued 


At a council of the elders it was voted to restore the 
broken walls of the city and the temple area, and to 
build in the city another wall which should completely 
cut off the citadel from the Upper Market. The pur- 
pose of this was to starve the garrison into surrender 
(I. Mac. xii. 35-37). 

68. Jonathan's power had reached its zenith, when 
another treacherous scheme in Syria involved him in 
its toils and ended his life. Tryphon wished to be 
king of Syria. It were not difficult to believe that this 
had been his ambition from the time he sought out the 
young Antiochus. Now he simply unmasked it. One 
of the very uncertain factors in realizing his plan was 
Jonathan, who was a friend to Antiochus, and who 
had besides much more to fear politically from Tryphon 
than from the young king. Tryphon came to Bethshan, 
in the valley of Jezreel, and there Jonathan met him 
with an army of forty thousand chosen men. It is 
well to note in passing what an index this large army 
is of the power of the Judean state. Tryphon, however, 
did not come to fight. That he did not dare to do, and, 
moreover, it was the man he wanted. Hence began 
that course of treachery about which the only surpris- 
ing feature is that Jonathan himself did not recognize 
it. Assurances of good-will, generous gifts, the prom- 
ise of Ptolemais and other strongholds, among which 
was included the citadel at Jerusalem, and a continued 
friendly alliance, — these were the means of persuad- 
ing Jonathan to dismiss all but one thousand of his 
men, who were to accompany him to Ptolemais. It 
may have been the very ambition of Jonathan which 
blinded him. Besides, this was not the first time that 
Ptolemais had been offered as a gift. The plot sue- 


ceeded all too well. Upon his arrival at the city Jona- 
than was made a prisoner and his troop massacred. 
Tryphon then attempted to destroy another detachment 
of two thousand sent by Jonathan into Galilee. In 
this he completely failed, and the news was carried to 
Jerusalem of the fate of Jonathan and his men. Natu- 
rally it was supposed that Jonathan had been put to 
death, and the whole land was in mourning. Through 
eighteen years he had enjoyed and constantly strength- 
ened the confidence of the people in his leadership. 
They were stricken again as they had been when Judas 
was taken, and the excitement and satisfaction which 
followed the news of this calamity in all the surround- 
ing heathen districts gave evidence of his strength and 
worth (I. Mac. xii. 39-53). 

69. One brother of the Hasmoneans was left, and, in 
some respects, the noblest of them all, — Simon. He 
was older than Jonathan, but with that same modest, 
self-sacrificing spirit which marks his action at this 
serious juncture, he had subordinated himself to Jona- 
than ; while in both civil and military affairs he had 
had wide experience. Seeing the need for immediate 
and resolute action, he called the people together, and 
in a speech full of spirit and devotion offered himself 
as leader. This was done with no vain eagerness for 
honor, but rather with a sacrifice of self to the needs 
of his people, and as such the offer was recognized and 
unanimously accepted (I. Mac. xiii. 1-9). Simon's 
co-operation with his brother in all plans of national 
defence and expansion made him ready to act at once 
with the highest efficiency. He finished the work at 
Jerusalem and sent one of his generals to take complete 
possession of Joppa. This city, hitherto Gentile, was 


now made Jewish territory, and thus established as an 
effective outpost for Jerusalem (I. Mac. xiii. 10, 11). 
Tryphon soon discovered that he had not materially 
furthered his cause by getting possession of the person 
of Jonathan. Simon took the field against him and sta- 
tioned himself at Adida to oppose his advance on Jeru- 
salem. Now, apparently for the first time, Simon 
learned that his brother had not been put to death, for 
Tryphon sent messengers offering to release him upon 
the payment of an hundred talents of silver and the de- 
liverance of two of his sons as hostages. The offer 
placed Simon in a very trying position. On one side he 
completely distrusted Tryphon, and on the other, he 
feared the people, if he appeared to hesitate about the 
deliverance of his brother. Accordingly he sent the 
money and the children, and the issue was as he ex- 
pected, — Jonathan was still kept a prisoner. Tryphon 
then marched southward in order to reach Jerusalem 
from Idumea by the way of Adora (Adoraim). Simon 
kept between him and the capital and at the same time 
pushed on vigorously the siege of the citadel. Learn- 
ing, through messengers sent to him, of the extremity 
of the besieged, Tryphon hurried his cavalry to their 
relief ; but a heavy fall of snow frustrated the attack 
and made necessary a complete change of plans. He 
marched southward around the Dead Sea and passed 
through Moab into Gilead. At Barcama, a site at 
present unknown, he murdered Jonathan and then 
returned to Antioch. Again the people were plunged 
into deep grief, and Simon but expressed their appre- 
ciation of the lost leader and his family when he carried 
his body to Modein and erected a costly monument to 
their memory (I. Mac. xiii. 12-30). 


70. Thus perished the man who was the real founder 
of the Maccabean state. It is only by casual state- 
ments here and there that one gathers the details 
which picture the conditions of the time. Within the 
life of the nation itself religious party-lines were being 
more sharply denned. Many of the nationalists, driven 
by the actual presence of an enemy in the land into 
co-operation with the Hasmoneans, were, nevertheless, 
out of sympathy with their wider aims. Under the 
leadership of Jonathan the Greek party had been in- 
creasingly limited, and the great leader had inspired 
such confidence in himself that he was able to call to- 
gether an army of fifty thousand men. The changing 
situation in Syria and his own shrewdness brought him 
almost within reach of the goal of all his striving, — 
the independence of Judea. Had he lived he would 
certainly have realized his ambition; but, though he 
himself could not enter into this " promised land," he 
had so far unified and strengthened the people that it 
was possible for them soon after his death to throw off 
finally the yoke of Syria. To him was given the honor 
of the " high-priesthood," making the Hasmoneans 
thenceforth both the religious and civil heads of the 
nation. He bequeathed to Simon the privilege of real- 
izing the hope of all his service, and with that realiza- 
tion the second stage in the history of the Maccabeans 
is reached. 

71. Tryphon's extremity soon proved Simon's oppor- 
tunity. Under guise of a surgical operation the former 
had Antiochus put to death, and then he himself as king 
revealed the baseness and worthlessness of his char- 
acter, alienating both the soldiers and the people. Dem- 
etrius II. (Nicator) was thereby strengthened in his 


hope of recovering supremacy. As the antagonist of 
Tiyphon, Simon sent him assurances of support, pro- 
vided he would grant in return freedom to the Jews. 
Demetrius's reply is given in full in I. Maccabees xiii. 
36-40, and is notable in these particulars : it recog- 
nizes Simon as high-priest, and does not go through 
the empty form of either appointing or confirming him ; 
it renews all the covenants made with Jonathan in 
145 b. c. ; and it removes the last mark of Jewish de- 
pendence, — the payment of the tribute. " Thus the 
yoke of the heathen was taken away from Israel in the 
one hundred and seventieth year " (xiii. 41), and that 
year, 143 B. C, became the dating point of a new era ; 
for " the affection of the people to Simon was so great 
that in their contracts with one another and in their 
public records, they wrote : 4 In the first year of Simon, 
the benefactor and ethnarch of the Jews ' " (Ant. xiii. 
6, 7 ; I. Mac. xiii. 42). 



72. It was one thing to bring Hellenism into Judea ; 
it was quite another to bring the Jews face to face with 
its power and charm in the great capitals of Syria and 
Egypt. Both Antioch and Alexandria were embodi- 
ments of an advanced Hellenization. Both gave to the 
Jews the rights of citizens, and in both was found that 
broader type of Judaism which, while holding to the 
sacredness of the law and the necessity of the temple- 
worship, was open to the better qualities of the heathen 
life about it. The subtle influence of daily association 
took the edge from sharp prejudice, and especially in 
Egypt conservatisni was not proof against the energetic 
speculativeness of Greek thought. Unfortunately data 
are wanting for estimating with any degree of fulness 
the social life of the Syrian capital. As compared with 
Alexandria, its interest in literary pursuits was meagre 
and unproductive. In all the luxuries of life, however, 
it was foremost. Glimpses which are given us of the 
court life during the struggles of Judas and Jonathan 
reveal a dissoluteness which must have had a deadening 
effect upon the city. Enjoyment was the main occu- 
pation of its inhabitants when they were not engaged 
in the repeated quarrels about the throne. By virtue 
of the rights given to them at the beginning, the Jews 
formed a separate community in the city and had their 


own organization. They were thus apart, while still 
within, the circle of influences which modified, in 
various degrees, their inherited conceptions. In 
Antioch, as well as in Alexandria, they profited by all 
the opportunities given them for trade, and were a 
thriving, industrious, well-to-do class. Their syna- 
gogue was one of the ornaments of the city. They 
were compelled to adopt the Greek language from the 
very necessities of their environment and thus had 
opened to them the literary stores of Greece. It is 
this double relationship, — on one side, to that part of 
the city which belonged exclusively to them as Jews, 
and, on the other, to the city at large, which was the 
embodiment of a complex social and religious life, — 
that explains both the tenacity and the pliancy of the 
Judaism of the dispersion. 

73. From time to time in the unfolding of the Mac- 
cabean history, our attention has been directed to 
Antioch. It was the refuge of many of the Hellenized 
Jews who were compelled to fly from Judea. There, 
too, the high-priest of the Greek party found au efficient 
supporter in the occupant of the Syrian throne. Antioch 
itself had many sympathizers with the broader views 
of the Judean Hellenists. Certainly this was the case 
in Egypt which was, also, at this time, an asylum for 
refugees from Judea, who were cordially received 
because of the faithful support always given by the 
Egyptian Jews to the Ptolemaic dynasty. Among 
those who sought safety in Alexandria was one who 
was destined to contribute a singular feature to the 
Judaism in Egypt. This was Onias IV., the son of 
the faithful high-priest deposed by Antiochus Epiph- 
anes and afterwards murdered at the instigation of 


Menelaus. Onias was a mere boy when he reached 
Alexandria, but he was welcomed as only the descend- 
ant of the most honored family in Israel could be. 
Under the friendly shelter of the Egyptian court he 
conceived the idea of providing for the Jews in Egypt 
a temple which would have at its head the rightful 
high-priest, and would be free from the pollution which 
had desecrated the holy place in Jerusalem. Sanction 
for this bold innovation was found, not only in the 
troubled and uncertain conditions in Judea, but also in 
a prophecy in Isaiah xix. 19 : " In that day shall there 
be an altar to the Lord in the midst of the land of 

74. The site selected was that of an old temple ruin 
in the district of Heliopolis, near the city of Leontopolis. 
Permission being given by Ptolemy to build, Onias 
erected here a tower-like structure (J. W. vii. 10, 3) 
sixty cubits high, and surrounded it by a wall of brick 
with stone gateways. There is nothing in the form of 
the structure whicji shows any desire to imitate the 
temple-building in Jerusalem. Indeed, the only exact 
copy of any feature of the Jerusalem temple was the 
altar itself (J. W. vii. 10, 3). Instead of the seven- 
branched candlestick, "a single lamp hammered out of 
a piece of gold illuminated the place with its rays " 
(J. W. vii. 10, 3). The revenue from a large tract of 
land was given by Ptolemy for its maintenance. A 
sufficient number of priests was already at hand, and the 
regular temple service was established and maintained 
from about 160 B. c. to 73 A. d., when the temple was 
closed by the Romans. To this period ten j^ears must 
be added if Wellhausen's view that the temple in Egypt 
was established by Onias III. in 170 b. c. be accepted. 


75. Questions at once arise regarding this Egyptian 
temple, not all of which are easy to answer. Had the 
Hasmoneans failed and the Jerusalem temple been 
completely destroyed, Judaism might have found its 
central point of interest in the new shrine at Leon- 
topolis, but the Hasmoneans did not fail. Religious 
freedom in Judea was never again lost after it was 
secured by Judas, and, within only a few years after 
the temple service began in Egypt, Jonathan put on the 
high-priestly robes. How then did these two temples 
stand related, and what was the attitude of the Jews 
in Egypt toward the temple in Jerusalem ? Josephus 
relates, in a passage which must be regarded with some 
suspicion, that the Jews and the Samaritans argued in 
Ptolemy's presence " over the question of the title of 
the temple at Jerusalem and of that on Mount Gerizim 
to be regarded as the true temple. " He states that in 
this dispute the Jews of Alexandria were "in great 
concern for those who were to contend for the temple 
in Jerusalem, for they took it very ill that any should 
try to take away the reputation of their temple, which 
was so ancient and celebrated all over the world" 
(Ant. xiii. 3, 4). There was, therefore, no lack of 
veneration on the part of the Jews in Egypt for 
the time-honored seat of worship in Jerusalem. The 
actual situation seems to have been that, while they 
rejoiced in a service of their own, they readily 
acknowledged their obligations to the re-established 
temple worship in Jerusalem, by contributing the 
regular tax assessed upon all the Jews of the disper- 
sion and by making, in common with Jews from all 
lands, pilgrimages to the Holy City. 

76. The reason for the building of the Egyptian 


temple suggested by Josephus in his Jewish An- 
tiquities (xiii. 3, 1) seems nearer the truth than the 
motive attributed to Onias in The Jewish War (vii. 
10, 3). The new temple was to be a place where 
the Jews of Egypt might meet together in harmony, 
rather than an expression of the high-priest's wounded 
vanity. It was set up, not as a mere rival of the 
Jerusalem temple, but as a compensation for die 
crippled and profaned worship conducted by such 
high-priests as Jason, Menelaus, and Alcimus. Since 
prophecy, as popularly interpreted, specifically pointed 
to this temple, it was long cherished by the Jews in 
Egypt. At Jerusalem itself it was never regarded 
with favor. As has already been remarked, it had 
been in existence for several years before the regular, 
orderly worship of the Jerusalem temple was restored 
under Jonathan. It was not easy to condemn its 
origin when the circumstances were considered, but as 
Gratz remarks : " The pious could not escape a certain 
discomfort from the' fact that the Heliopolitan temple 
was in itself a violation of the law of worship, and out 
of the contradictory feelings toward it — honor in its 
origin in the stress of the times and discomfort over 
its unlawful existence — resulted that wavering esti- 
mate of it which is expressed in the laws enacted 
regarding it" (iii. 36). Philo, who greatly honored the 
temple in Jerusalem, says nothing against the one 
in Egypt, such regulations as prohibited its priests 
from officiating at Jerusalem being of later origin. In 
general it may be said that, while it never attained 
any real importance for Judaism as a whole, it did 
tend to increase the separation between the Jews of 
Palestine and Egypt. 


77. Unlike, then, their countrymen dispersed in 
other lands, the Jews in Egypt had, in addition to 
the regular services of the synagogue, — that bulwark 
of faith for the thousands who were away from Jeru- 
salem, — the regular ritual of the temple service, and 
yet, despite all, " the genius of Egyptian Judaism was 
not the priestly house of Onias, but the royal house of 
Ptolemy.' ' The liberal and enriching policy of the 
Ptolemies had made Alexandria one of the most 
brilliant capitals of the ancient world, a royal resi- 
dence, a commercial metropolis, and a university city, 
all in one. The tone, the variety, and the stimulus 
in its life awakened and fascinated the thoughtful 
minds of every people within its borders. Here were 
temples to different divinities, lecture halls for the 
exposition of diverse philosophies, a library unequalled 
in literary treasures, and in all was the restless activity 
of scholars and teachers. No wall, such as enclosed 
the Jewish quarter, could be high enough to shut out 
the power and influence of all this from the followers 
of Moses, earnest and devoted though they might be. 
Nor did it. The door which had opened wide the way 
from Jewish seclusion to all this multiform life was 
the Greek language. So completely had the Jews 
taken this as their medium of intercourse, not only 
with the outside world, but among themselves, that 
they required a translation of their own scriptures 
into it, which was known as the Septuagint. This 
noble version itself reveals the influence of " the outer 
thought" in its interpretative translations (Kent, His- 
tory Jewish People, sect. 284). 

78. Two facts, however, need emphasis in order to 
make clear the character of nearly all the Graeco- 


Jewish literature from the Septuagint to the writings 
of Josephus. The first is that the Jews in their sepa- 
rate city-quarter maintained rigidly their own worship 
and customs; the second, that in Alexandria phi- 
losophy first came into contact with revelation. The 
rights and privileges given the Jews, their own pros- 
perity, due to industry and thrift, and their worth to 
the ruling powers early made them objects of jealousy 
to the Greeks and native Egyptians. Jealousy sug- 
gested those accusations which aimed at pouring con- 
tempt upon this " upstart and exclusive " people who 
refused to share in the worship of the city and who 
were limited in their intercourse with the rest of man- 
kind by their prohibitive customs. It was commonly 
reported that, as a people, they had their origin in a 
great company of lepers whom a certain priest, called 
Moses, really Osarsiph, had persuaded into adopting a 
new religion which he offered them. Their distin- 
guishing customs were defamed and construed as evi- 
dences of a real hatred toward all men except Jews 
(Against Apion ii. 15). The chief framers of all these 
attacks were the Alexandrian literati ; and it was both 
for purposes of enlightenment and persuasion that 
the Jews replied, using , the literary form of their 
opponents to set forth the antiquity and worth of their 
nation. History and poetry as well as direct argumen- 
tation were employed to show up the falsehood of the 
accounts written against them. 

79. Only fragments of most of these works have 
been preserved for us, but they are sufficient to give 
U3 some idea of the extent of the acquaintance of the 
Jews with the literature of the Greeks. When, in 
the interest of their cause, they can appeal to early 


Greek historians, and, further, in the case of some, 
expand their narratives so as to make them more 
effective ; when, with the same end in view, they can 
forge verses in the name of the Greek poets, and 
finally use the Sibyl herself as a means of substantiat- 
ing their claims, — whatever may be the moral quality 
of the defence, it certainly reveals more than a super- 
ficial knowledge of Greek literature. Granted that all 
this literature was read with an apologetic interest, it 
nevertheless, in turn, made its own appeal and exerted 
its own influence. The Jews were thus brought face 
to face with questionings and conceptions that were at 
once noble and profound, and their self-complacency 
was surprised with teachings which were not far re- 
moved from the best utterances of their own sacred 

80. Especially was this true in the realm of philo- 
sophic thought; where the great questions respecting 
God, the origin of the world and the soul, and the 
real object of life were discussed with that keenness 
and care which would awaken the deepest interest of 
the Jew. The one holy and almighty God of his 
sacred writings was the Infinite, the one Good, the 
First Cause of Greek philosophy, and in each case the 
realities of creation, soul, and life were in keeping 
with the conception of God. Was there any funda- 
mental relation between these and the God of Genesis ? 
Could the Hebrew Jehovah be commended to the 
Greek mind ? Were the institutions of Moses, when 
properly understood, in harmony with the teachings 
of philosophy? These, or questions like them, gave 
an impulse to that earnest endeavor which was appar- 
ent in Judeo-Alexandrian thinking from the time of 


Aristobulus to that of Philo, — indeed, which was in 
operation in all probability from the very beginning of 
Hellenic Judaism ; namely, the reconciliation of phi- 
losophy and revelation. While Judaism in Palestine 
was fighting its way to political independence, there 
was going steadily forward that process of amalgama- 
tion of Jewish conceptions and philosophic interpre- 
tations which reached its climax in Philo Judseus. 

81. Among the earliest leaders in this movement 
was Aristobulus, the teacher of Ptolemy Philometor. 
He was a Jewish priest, and there is no good reason 
for doubting that he is the one addressed in II. Mac- 
cabees i. 10, as " the master of King Ptolemeus." 
He wrote his Explanation of the Mosaic Laws for 
Ptolemy himself (170-150 b. a). Only two frag- 
ments of the whole work are preserved for us by 
Eusebius in his Preparatio Evangelica, viii. 10 and 
xiii. 12. The aim of Aristobulus was to show that 
the Greek philosophers, and especially the Peripa- 
tetics, were dependent upon the laws of Moses and 
upon the other prophets for their doctrines. Years 
after Philo echoed this doctrine. In Aristobulus we 
find the beginnings of that method of allegorical inter- 
pretation which in later years became both the char- 
acteristic and bane of Alexandrian thinking. He 
uses it to explain what is meant when the Scripture 
says that God has hands, arms, face, and feet; that 
he descended in fire on Sinai, and that he rested on 
the Sabbath day. The attempt to get behind these 
forms of statement to what was actually meant by 
them is the inevitable tendency of reflective minds. 
Much that Aristobulus gives in the way of interpre- 
tation would now find ready acceptance. It is only 


when the allegorical explanation transmutes facts intc 
the airy nothings of merely ideal relations that it 
becomes fanciful and untrustworthy. This extreme 
is once and again exemplified in Philo. Aristobulus 
seems to have tried to give, in part at least, a sober 
explanation of the Mosaic law, but he frequently reveals 
his Alexandrian training, as when he appeals to Greek 
philosophers or poets for the substantiation of his 
interpretations. Verses purporting to come from 
Orpheus, Hesiod, and Homer, which had been in all 
probability forged in the interests of Jewish claims, 
are accepted by Aristobulus in good faith. Indeed, 
the fragments of his work which have been preserved 
to us illustrate nearly all the features of the earnest 
attempt made in Alexandria to harmonize the teach- 
ings of the Jewish scriptures with the best concep- 
tions of Greek thought. 

82. A work of an entirely different kind, showing 
in its own way the fusion of Jewish and Greek con- 
ceptions, is The Wisdom of Solomon, commonly called 
The Book of Wisdom. It is the classic of Judeo- 
Alexandrine literature, and in some respects the most 
important of the books of the Apocrypha. Its Hel- 
lenistic character is revealed not in its allegorical 
interpretations, — although these are to be found in 
it, — nor in the literary form in which the truth is 
presented, for its form follows that of the wisdom 
literature of the Old Testament. It is rather to be 
seen in the fact that its broad, noble teachings are 
given a richer meaning and a wider application by 
their statement in terms and relations suggested in 
part by the thinkers of Greece. Interest centres in 
the views of God, man, and the world, which are the 



result of the modification of Hebrew thinking by 
Greek influences. 

83. The book is really a series of discourses upon 
given texts (i. 1; i. 12; vi. 12; ix. 18; xi. 5), and 
it contains passages of rare eloquence and beauty (see 
vii. 22 to viii. 1). Wisdom, divine and human, is its 
theme ; and whether it speaks of it in its relation to 
God, or as a quality of human life, it is always to 
glorify its worth and power. In its divine aspect 
Wisdom is 

a breath of the power of God, 
And a clear effluence of the glory of the Almighty ; 
Therefore can nothing defiled find entrance into her. 
For she is an effulgence from everlasting light, 
And an unspotted mirror of the working of God, 
And an image of his goodness ; 
And she, being one, hath power to do all things ; 
And remaining in herself, reneweth all things (vii. 25-27). 

All this is in keeping with the doctrine of Wisdom 
as found in the books of the Old Testament and in 
Ecclesiasticus ; but it also marks an advance upon 
their teachings. The conception of the nature, sphere, 
and operation of Wisdom verges upon that of a dis- 
tinct, intermediary reality between God and the world ; 
and here the whole doctrine reveals the influence of 
that speculative trend which culminated in the Logos- 
teaching of Philo. 

84. It is clear that there is no separable existence 
of Wisdom predicated, but only such a setting forth 
of her relation to God as constitutes a preparation for 
the later revelations of the New Testament, making 
some of the terms used accurately applicable to the 


position and dignity of Christ (Wis. vii. 26 ; Heb. i. 3). 
In one instance Wisdom is identified with the Spirit of 
God, " pervading and penetrating all things by reason 
of her pureness " (i. 7 ; xii. 1 ; vii. 24) ; in another 
with the Word (ix. 1, 2), and in another with the di- 
vine Power or Justice or with Providence. Wisdom, 
in whom was an "understanding spirit" (vii. 22), was 
the architect of the world, and that too out of " matter 
without form " (xi. 17), — a statement notable, as are 
others in the book, for the forms of expression which 
have been taken from Greek philosophy and used to 
clothe ideas which are Jewish in substance. This re- 
veals again the place which this book occupies in that 
line of development which was preparing the medium 
of truth for the revelations of the truth itself. It is in 
a sense true that the Greek language itself would not 
have been fully ready for the teachings of the New 
Testament had not Judaism in part worked out its 
mission in Alexandria. 

85. Inclusive as the term Wisdom is on the human 
side in the earlier Wisdom books, it is here given a far 
wider range. A knowledge of nature which is the 
outcome of a scientific interest in her factors and laws ; 
an understanding of history which grasps the purpose 
lying behind its ceaseless succession of events ; a com- 
prehension of the meaning of life which issues from a 
firm belief in immortality with its blessedness or woe, 
— all these are made part of that wisdom which, as far 
as man is concerned, has its root in " the fear of the 
Lord " and its sure unfolding through communion 
with him. In a great variety of ways the blessings 
which she will confer upon man are set forth. She 
will be to him a counsellor in good things, a comfort 


ill cares and grief, a source of honor and fame, and, 
above all, a means of gaining immortal life (viii.). 
Without her man is only "ignorant, feeble, sensuous, 

86. It has with truth been said that "the book 
marks the highest point of religious knowledge at- 
tained by the Jews in the period between the close of 
the old Testament canon and the beginning of the Gos- 
pel dispensation." Its teaching regarding the life be- 
yond is of surprising clearness and force (v. 14, 15). 
Its conception of God has in it the light of such truth 
as this : " Thou lovest all the things that are and ab- 
horrest nothing which thou hast made : for never 
wouldst thou have formed anything if thou hadst 
hated it. And how would anything have endured if 
it had not been thy will, or been preserved if not called 
into existence by thee ? But thou sparest all : for they 
are thine, O Lord, thou lover of souls" (xi. 24-26). 
Its doctrine of the soul is moulded by teachings foreign 
to the Old Testament. " The immortality of the soul," 
a phrase neither Judaistic nor Christian, but virtually 
Platonic, expresses exactly its hope for the future. 
The body is a weight and perishable. The pre-existent 
soul came into it and at last shall be freed from it as 
from a prison (viii. 20; ix. 15). There is no trace of 
a teaching of the resurrection of the body in the book. 
Wisdom saves the soul, bringing it at last to the in- 
effable glory of God's own presence. Such in merest 
outline is the character of this remarkable book. To 
faithful Jews in trial and depression it brought the 
richest comfort and hope. To those, whether Jews or 
Gentiles, who went the way of " folly," it spoke its 
solemn warnings, and commended with zealous earn- 


estness the blessings of Wisdom both for this life and 
the life to come. 

87. About the time when the name of Solomon was 
used to commend " the Wisdom which saves " to all 
who would receive it and especially to heathen rulers, 
another striking method was employed to reach the 
minds and hearts of the Gentiles. The Sibyl, that 
strange, exceptional, semi-divine prophetess of the will 
of the heathen gods, was made to speak for and about 
the chosen people and by her message to win men to the 
faith. It was a clever device. The mystery attached 
to the whole activity of the Sibyl, and the fact that her 
oracles were commonly kept carefully guarded, only 
added to the interest of such words as could be heard 
or read. The Sibylline Oracles, which are " Jewish 
and Christian works under a heathen mask," are con- 
tained in fourteen books of widely different dates and 
of varied authorship. They have no inner connection, 
and extend far down into the Christian period. That 
part of them which came from Egypt and the period 
under consideration is found in Book III., which may 
be reasonably dated about 140 B. c. The Sibyl speaks 
in hexameters and in the language of Homer. 

88. Beginning with line ninety-seven, where this 
third book really commences, a rapid review of man's 
history is given from the building of the tower of 
Babel to the rise of the Romans (97-161). At this 
point prophecy begins and its word is concerning the 
Grseco-Macedonian and Roman kingdoms, and con- 
cerning the sovereignty of the people of God, who 
rahall come to power after the seventh king of Helle- 
nistic origin shall have ruled over Egypt. The vision 
of the rulership of Israel and of the attendant judg- 


merit of evil nations leads the seer to sketch the char- 
acter and history of the Jewish people from the exodus 
to the time of Cyrus (162-294). Then follow declara- 
tions of judgment and disaster which are to come to 
various nations and cities, and against the darkness is 
thrown the bright promise of Messianic prosperity and 
peace (295-380). Once more the stern word of judgment 
is uttered against various peoples of the Hellenic world, 
and then, after the prediction of a great final judgment, 
follows the promise of a Messianic kingdom and glory 
(380-807). This third book is itself a collection of 
disconnected oracles. They have, however, one com- 
mon purpose, and this is seen in the earnest admoni- 
tions against idolatry and the repeated exhortations to 
come within the range of the promises made to God's 
chosen people. Ity history and prophecy alike the cer- 
tainty of judgment upon the ungodly is made clear, and 
the bright hope of the days of the Messiah is given all 
possible attractiveness that it may win men to Israel's 
faith. Never before had the Sibyl spoken a message 
which made such an appeal to the highest, truest in- 
terests of men. The Judaism of Alexandria in its 
contact with the thought of the world had by no 
means lost its earnest spirit or its saving faith. 



89. Short as was the rule of Simon, it was never- 
theless marked by a brilliancy that completed the 
glory of the Maccabean house. Though his hair was 
gray when the full responsibilities of leadership were 
put into his hands, his glowing zeal, unremitting 
energy, and clever diplomacy succeeded in achieving 
the independence for which Jonathan and he had long 
toiled and fought. To be sure, Demetrius had given 
him rights and powers which seem of little value when 
one thinks of the giver as an exiled king ; but Simon 
acted as though they had come to him from the throne 
itself and lost no time in securing their full actualiza- 
tion. The troubles of Syria itself left him free to 
attend to the needs of his own government. The first 
requirement was complete possession of his dominions. 
Gazara, at the foot of the mountains and commanding 
the road from Joppa to Jerusalem, Bethsur, menac- 
ing the road from the south, and the citadel in Jeru- 
salem, were yet held by the Hellenists. In order to 
secure an open road to the coast and make most ser- 
viceable the port of Joppa, Simon turned his attention 
first to the siege of Gazara. By means of a movable 
tower the place was quickly brought to terms. After 
the inhabitants were driven out and the city purged 
of all traces of heathenism, Simon placed in charge 


"such men as would keep the law," and strengthened 
its fortifications. Next Bethsur yielded, and then, at 
last, the citadel at Jerusalem, which had so long been 
closely besieged. By the help of the wall which Jona- 
than had built (sect. 67), the garrison was starved 
into surrender. It is not difficult to imagine the 
rejoicing in Jerusalem on that day in May, 142 b. c, 
when " with thanksgiving and branches of palm-trees, 
and with harps and cymbals, and with viols and 
hymns and songs" the festal procession entered the 
old fortress that for twenty-six years had disturbed 
the peace of the city. For a time the day of this 
triumph was annually kept as a festival (I. Mac. xiii. 

90. Simon was now in possession of all the strong- 
holds of Judea. Owing to the apparent disagree- 
ment between the statements of First Maccabees and 
Josephus, there is some doubt as to what was actually 
done with the citadel. Josephus declares that Simon 
razed the fortress to the ground and then levelled the 
hill on which it stood, so that the temple should never 
again be in danger of an attack from a commanding 
elevation. Three years of constant labor were re- 
quired to complete this task, which materially changed 
the aspect of the city, since the cuttings from the hill 
were used to fill in the valley lying between it and the 
temple mount (Ant. xiii. 6, 7; J. W. v. 4). The 
reasonableness of Josephus's version is evident; but 
the work of destruction could not have been under- 
taken immediately after the capture of the citadel, for 
Simon retained the fortress as one of his defences in 
the city, keeping there a garrison of Jewish soldiers 
(I. Mac. xiv. 37). It is probable that the work was 


done later in Simon's time, and that Josephus's account 
is a sort of summary of the policy of Simon in regard 
to Jewish strongholds. If this is not the true expla- 
nation, the account of Josephus is unhistorical, and 
the whole work belongs, as Schurer maintains, to the 
reign of another ruler. The significant fact was the 
capture of the citadel. When this was accomplished, 
Simon stood at the zenith of Jewish triumph. The 
Hellenists were compelled to seek refuge in Alexan- 
dria or Syria, unless, indeed, they quietly accepted 
the new conditions. Those who would neither flee 
nor submit were put to death. Appointing his son 
John, "a valiant man," captain of all his hosts, Simon 
devoted his attention to the management of the civil 
and religious affairs of the nation. The brief sen- 
tences of First Maccabees present a picture of the 
internal condition of Israel at this happy time. At 
the head of the nation stood a man whose wise, benefi- 
cent counsels were ever for its good. This fact is 
really the explanation of the whole record that follows, 
which glorifies this leader. It is easy to understand 
how it could be said that "his reign was one of the 
happiest periods ever experienced in Israel." 

91. The port which Judea held at this time had 
only recently come into her possession. Even though 
Jonathan had taken Joppa, the ugly fortress of 
Gazara in the Shephelah hills, had made the trade 
route to the sea unsafe. Now the road was open, and 
Simon made it one of his first duties by extensive 
improvements to prepare the harbor for intercourse 
with "the isles of the sea." A basis was thus estab- 
lished for a maritime trade, and Judea invited to her 
borders the commerce of the Mediterranean. Wher- 


ever and whenever he heard of Jewish captives, he 
redeemed them from prisons and strange cities and 
restored them to their native land. They came back 
to the quiet and rest of peace under which the land 
itself was renewed by the hand of the husbandman 
and of the vine-dresser. The rocky hills of Judea 
soon tell the tale, either of neglect or of cultivation. 
War had made them desolate. Now the terraced hill- 
sides and the fruitful valleys once more gave their 
increase. The whole picture reminds the Jewish 
historian of that description from the prophet in which 
the blessings of the Messianic times are set forth. 
Old men sit in the streets communing together of 
good things, and the young men display in pardonable 
pride the equipment of the soldier, — heroes, indeed, 
in the villages and towns to which they had come back 
from "the wars." There is no fear in the village 
street, for the land is free. "Every man sits under 
his vine and his fig-tree, and there is none to make 
them afraid." Those who had suffered in the rigor of 
days gone by were especial objects of Simon's care, 
and so, too, all who were now oppressed. The day 
of blessing was for those who had been faithful to the 
law; while he who despised it or neglected it was 
"taken away." Life throughout the land was full of 
joy ; and when the people went up to the temple, they 
saw there also the beneficent work of their leader, for 
"he beautified the sanctuary and multiplied the ves- 
sels needed in its service " (I. Mac. xiv. 4-15). 

92. It is not strange that the people were ready 
to express in formal decree their appreciation of the 
noble results that had been achieved. In September, 
141 b. c, in the third year of Simon's reign, a great 


assembly of the priests, leaders, and people, which 
was held in the great court of the temple, resolved 
that Simon should be civil governor, military chief, and 
high-priest " forever until there should arise a faithful 
prophet." The honor was complete; it included the 
headship of all the spheres of national activity, and it 
made the exalted office hereditary. Simon, by the will 
of the nation, was virtually placed in the position of 
sovereign. It will be understood that he had exer- 
cised all these powers hitherto. He now received the 
formal sanction of the people with the additional right 
to hand down these honors to his children. As a 
mark of the exalted character of his leadership, it was 
further decreed that all contracts should be made in 
his name, and that he should "be clothed in purple 
and wear gold." These decrees, accompanied by a 
review of Simon's services to the nation, were en- 
graved on tablets of brass and placed in a conspicuous 
place in the temple. It is doubtful if ever before 
such honor was given by the Jews to one of their 
rulers. It marks the climax in the career of the Mac- 
cabees (I. Mac. xiv. 25-49). 

93. The reign of Simon was characterized by two 
important political acts, — his embassy to Rome and 
his coinage of money. The light of after events 
makes the repeated appeals of the Maccabees to Rome 
seem like a fatal hallucination ; but their policy is to 
be judged rather in the light of the times. Certainly 
Syria was a constant cause of anxiety, and the only 
power whose authority was recognized and feared by 
her was that of Rome. Simon, therefore, followed in 
the footsteps of his brothers in seeking to draw the 
Romans into closer bonds of friendship. He sent an 


embassy headed by Numenius to ask confirmation of 
the league made with them in earlier days, and, as a 
token of good-will, they carried with them "a great 
shield of gold of a thousand pound weight." The 
mission was in every way successful. After courteous 
treatment of them, the Senate placed in their hands a 
decree granting all that they sought. Letters were 
sent to Egypt, Syria, Pergamum, Cappadocia, and to 
many small independent states and cities, warning 
them against making war upon the Jews, or ever 
assisting those who might engage in hostilities with 
them, and commanding them to give up all fugitives 
to Simon, to be punished in accordance with the Jew- 
ish law. Copies of these letters were sent to Simon. 
Holtzmann calls our attention to the fact that we have 
here the first great attempt to restrict the blending of 
the Jews with the nations among which they were dis- 
persed, on the ground of a jurisdiction which per- 
tained to them as well as to those in Judea, and which 
was to be recognized by foreign peoples. Not only a 
religious but also a legal bond was to hold them in 
inseparable connection with the fatherland (Geschichte 
des Volkes Israel, ii. 378). The recognition by the 
Romans made more evident the unity of this widely 
scattered people, and at the same time gave a Jew in 
foreign lands a new sense of dignity. Thus was the 
light of the bright days of Simon's administration 
reflected upon the Jews in all lands (I. Mac. xiv. 24; 
xv. 15-24). 

94. The other distinctive feature of Simon's reign, 
the coinage of money, is first referred to in the letter of 
Antiochus of Syria to Simon, asking his help toward 
the regaining of his throne, 140-139 B. c. (I. Mac. 


xv. 6). The right of making coins was generally rec- 
ognized in antiquity as a mark of sovereignty. This 
privilege, therefore, gave new emphasis to the inde- 
pendence of Judea. It is to be noted, however, that 
Simon coined money before he was offered the privi- 
lege by Antiochus. This he did for only one year, 
but the act shows clearly his own conception of his 
position. Of this coinage there are extant silver 
shekels and half -shekels, with the words, "Shekel of 
Israel " on one side around a cup or chalice, and on 
the other the words, "Jerusalem the Holy," about a 
central device which is interpreted as Aaron's rod. 
Their dates range through five years of Simon's 
leadership, 141-140 to 137-136 b. c. The fact that 
Antiochus, soon after the granting of the privilege of 
coining money, "broke all the covenants," left Simon 
to act largely on his own responsibility in regard to 
the coinage. Thus with all the marks of a king, save 
the name, Simon ruled in Israel. There could be no 
king again until the Messiah should come, but this 
governor, this prince in Judea, could ask no larger 
recognition than was given him. For a few years these 
peaceful conditions continued, but Syria was too near 
and her internal discords too constant to allow a 
lengthened respite. Once more came the call to war. 
95. After his alliance with Simon, Demetrius II., 
in order to get help against Tryphon, made an expedi- 
tion into the East. The Parthians had overrun the 
eastern provinces of the Syrian kingdom and were 
detested by the inhabitants, who already had sent 
several embassies to Demetrius, asking him to come 
and lead them against their common enemy; but the 
first promise of success was, at length, lost in the 


capture of Demetrius through treachery in 138 B. C. 
During this time Tryphon had held possession of 
Syria, though Cleopatra, the wife of Demetrius II., 
had maintained her husband's cause at Seleucia. Now 
that he was a prisoner in Parthia, she invited An- 
tiochus, the brother of her husband, who was named 
Sidetes from a town in Pamphylia, where he had been 
brought up, to join with her in driving out Tryphon. 
He consented so fully as to make himself at once the 
claimant of the Syrian throne. At this point the his- 
tory again touches that of Judea, for Antiochus made 
advances to Simon, confirming him in all he had re- 
ceived, and promising still greater honors if he would 
support him. Two thousand men were sent to help 
in the siege of Dora, on the coast just below Carmel, 
but so completely had the tide of affairs turned against 
Tryphon that Sidetes, though he had taken provisions, 
declined to receive the troops and broke faith with 
Simon. His sudden success led him to the determi- 
nation to bring Judea again into submission. Accord- 
ingly he sent a certain Athenobius to Jerusalem, 
demanding the surrender of Joppa, Gazara, and the 
citadel, or in lieu of them five hundred talents of 
silver, and another five hundred for payment of dam- 
ages and tribute. 

96. Simon's reply was brief and pointed. The 
most he would allow was one hundred talents. In 
anger, Sidetes, as soon as he was relieved of Tryphon, 
sent an army into Judea. Cendebeus, the general of 
this force, took his position near Jamnia and began 
a war of petty inroad along different routes leading 
out from his encampment. The exasperated Simon 
committed the task of punishing this bad faith and 


insolence to his two sons, Jonathan and Judas, and 
faithfully they executed it. The Syrian army was so 
disastrously defeated that Antiochus did not again in 
Simon's lifetime attempt an invasion. 

97. This episode shows how near Judea was to 
trouble and danger. Any disaffection within her own 
borders was sure of sympathy in Antioch, while the 
undefined relation of her government to that of the 
Syrian court made her the tempting object of every 
successful adventurer's cupidity. It is probable that 
the fruitless expedition of Cendebeus, and the treach- 
ery at Jericho of Ptolemy, the trusted son-in-law of 
Simon, were due to a suggestion of Antiochus to 
the effect that the removal of Simon would be looked 
upon in Antioch as a highly meritorious deed. The 
hope of support and reward from the Syrian court 
alone explains how such a shameless traitor as Ptolemy, 
the son of Abubus, could murder his honored and 
generous father-in-law and defy the nation. It cer- 
tainly was a kind of attack against which Simon could 
in no way prepare himself, and unsuspectingly he 
went to the banquet which Ptolemy had prepared for 
him at Docus, a stronghold near Jericho. The aged 
ruler was on one of his tours of inspection through 
the country and took with him to Docus his two sons, 
Mattathias and Judas. In the midst of the banquet 
they were all murdered. 

98. A fitting close to this noble life would have 
been a quiet death amid the happy conditions which 
he had done so much to bring about; but this was 
denied him, as it had been to Judas and Jonathan. 
With the account of his death the First Book of Mac- 
cabees comes to a close. It has carried us through 


the heroic struggles of Mattathias and of his stalwart 
sons; from Modein to Jerusalem; from the decree of 
Antiochus Epiphanes, devoting the Jews to extermi- 
nation unless they would become apostates, to the 
decree which made the last of the Maccabean sons 
the prince of Israel; from the threatening ascendancy 
of Hellenism to the supremacy of Judaism. It has 
also faithfully given us the shadow touches in the 
whole picture, so that we are not left to strange sur- 
prise in the later unfoldings of Judean history. The 
points of possible reaction are not concealed. Like 
some noble tree in the splendor of its summer foliage, 
at whose heart forces are working which shall bring 
its stately form to the ground, so stood Judea in the 
glory of Simon's reign, but within her, too, were 
forces destined to work her disaster. 




99. It was part of Ptolemy's nefarious plan to take 
the life of John, the third son of Simon, and com- 
mander in Gazara; but a timely warning saved the 
prince to a long and distinguished leadership in Judea, 
135-105 B. c. John, known by the name of Hyr- 
canus, has often been compared to Solomon in the 
character of his reign, and, in two particulars at least, 
the comparison is striking; namely, in the extent of 
the kingdom over which he reigned, and in the sharp 
antithesis of his strong, peaceful rulership to the times 
of trouble and unrest which preceded and followed it. 
The same deed that made him ruler deprived him of 
father, mother, and two brothers, and ranked him as 
the foe of Antiochus Sidetes; but the blood of the 
Hasmoneans was in his veins and he had been trained 
by one who knew how to govern and fight. It was 
wholly in accord with the desire of the people that he 
became high-priest and ruler; and Jerusalem gave 
him a warm welcome. His first duty was to punish 
the murderer of his father. Ptolemy, after his act of 
treachery, attempted to make himself master of the 
capital; but failing, retired to his fortress at Docus. 
Here Hyrcanus besieged him but was deterred from 
capturing the fortress because Ptolemy threatened to 
throw the mother of Hyrcanus headlong from the 

7 . 


walls if an assault was made. The return of the Sab- 
batical year necessitated a rest from war, and thus gave 
Ptolemy an opportunity to escape. After murdering 
the mother of Hyrcanus, he fled to Philadelphia, 
where he disappeared forever. 

100. Hardly was this trouble past, when word came 
that Sidetes was on the march from Syria with a large 
army. The refusals and victory of Simon had not 
been forgotten. Instead of meeting the foe in the 
mountains, as Judas would have done, Hyrcanus shut 
himself up in Jerusalem, and soon the city was sur- 
rounded. Hyrcanus relied upon the walls for defence 
and upon sallies against the besiegers ; Sidetes planned 
to starve the Jews into surrender. To this end he 
surrounded the city " with seven camps " and at all 
places of possible exit doubled his guard. The siege 
was long protracted and brought the Jews to desperate 
straits. All who could not bear weapons were sent 
out of the city, but even they could not get past the 
Syrian lines, and many of them perished between the 
two forces. At last, on the occasion of the Feast of 
Tabernacles, Hyrcanus asked Sidetes for a truce of 
seven days, that the people might observe the feast. 
The request is an evidence of the religious fidelity of 
the Jews. This feast was usually one of great rejoic- 
ing; it could have been anything but that now. Their 
loyalty to faith seemed commendable to Sidetes, who 
in reality was one of the better Syrian monarchs, and 
he sent with his compliance gifts for sacrifice in the 
temple. The gates were opened to all who had been 
sent out, and Hyrcanus took the opportunity of ap- 
proaching Sidetes with terms of peace. The Syrian 
king was ready to listen, and it was finally agreed 


that the Jews should deliver up their arms, pay tribute 
for Joppa, and the other cities which bordered upon 
Judea, give him hostages, and in addition pay five 
hundred talents of silver. Two things are notable in 
the conference which resulted in this agreement. One 
was the rejection by Sidetes of the counsel offered by 
the extremists in his camp, who wanted the Jews 
destroyed ; the other, the refusal of the Jews to allow 
a garrison to be placed again in Jerusalem. The wis- 
dom of Sidetes saved him from another Maccabean 
uprising; the firmness of the Jews freed them from 
the plague of an enemy within their very doors. With 
three hundred of the promised talents, and the son of 
Hyrcanus among the hostages, Sidetes withdrew from 
Judea, having attended to the demolition of the walls 
of Jerusalem before his departure (Ant. xiii. 8, 2-3). 

101. In this settlement an influence was active 
which is not referred to in the pages of Josephus, 
the Roman Senate. Just such a situation as that in 
which the Jews were placed warranted the interfer- 
ence of the Romans, for they had expressly warned 
the nations against making war upon Judea (see sect. 
93). Hyrcanus sent an embassy to remind them of 
their agreement (Ant. xiii. 9, 2). This embassy asked 
that Joppa, and Gazara, and "several other cities 
which Antiochus had taken from them in war," 
should be given back, and "that whatever had been 
decreed by Antiochus during the war, without the 
consent of the Senate, might be made void." As this 
account stands in Josephus, it seems to follow the 
close of the war; but it must be placed some time 
before the surrender at Jerusalem, for Antiochus VII. 
is the only Antiochus who could have taken from the 


Jews, in the time of Hyrcanus, the cities of Joppa and 
Gazara. These were captured, in all probability, on 
the march of Antiochus to Jerusalem. The Romans 
promised to gratify the Jews, but because of trouble- 
some affairs of their own, delayed attending to the 
matter. Later Hyrcanus sent another embassy, which 
secured from the Senate peremptory orders that all 
towns taken by Antiochus should be restored (Ant. 
xiv. 10, 22). The command was too explicit to be 
disobeyed, hence Antiochus contented himself with 
tribute and hostages (Schurer i. 1, 227). The final out- 
come represented a victory for the Jews, although the 
return to the position of dependence was humiliating. 

102. The new arrangement gave assurance of con- 
tinued peace, for there was far more likelihood of 
returning misfortune if the hated Syrians were alto- 
gether excluded from the land. Tribute could be 
paid until the Jews found an opportunity to refuse; 
and the tangled interests at Antioch might make that 
at any moment possible. They soon did so. The 
friendly feeling between Antiochus and Hyrcanus, at 
the time of the armistice for the feast, continued after 
the capitulation, and Hyrcanus accompanied the Syrian 
king on an expedition into Parthia. Here Antiochus 
lost his life, 128 B. c, and Demetrius II., who was 
released from prison when Antiochus invaded Parthia, 
hastened back to Antioch to seize the throne. With 
his return begins a series of events in Syria, whose 
chief interest is in the fact that it gave Hyrcanus 
ample opportunity to re-establish himself in power. 
The Syrians appealed to Ptolemy VII. against Deme- 
trius, and Alexander Zabinas was placed on the throne. 
He in turn was overthrown by Antiochus VIII., the 


son of Demetrius, who ruled quietly for eight years, 
and then was obliged to give up the throne to 
Antiochus IX. After this king had reigned two 
years, Antiochus VIII. again gained possession of the 
greater part of Syria, made his place of residence in 
Coele-Syria, and ruled until 95 B. c. (Ant. xiii. 8, 4; 
9, 3; 10, 1). Hyrcanus was practically independent. 
After the death of Sidetes, he neither paid taxes nor 
gave much attention to the affairs of Syria, but de- 
voted all of his energy to the building up of the 
strength of Judea. Taking advantage of the troubles 
in Syria, he first gave his attention to securing the 
land against his immediate neighbors on the north, 
east, and south. They were always ready, not only to 
help an invading army, but also themselves to throw 
all possible hindrances in the way of Judea's progress. 
They must now either be driven out or put under 

103. To carry out his large plans, Hyrcanus, first 
among the Jewish princes, engaged foreign troops. 
His policy of conquest soon awakened strong opposi- 
tion in the nation. The employment of foreign merce- 
naries made the entire project even more unpopular. 
The inseparable relation between political indepen- 
dence and religious freedom, however, justified Hyr- 
canus in his efforts. He set out first for the region 
across the Jordan. Medeba, which had already shown 
its hostility (sect. 54), was taken after a trying siege 
of six months, and then Samega (El S&mik), probably 
situated just east of the ancient Heshbon. The army 
then recrossed the Jordan and captured Shechem, 
destroying at the same time the temple on Mount 
Gerizim. For nearly three hundred years this temple 


had been the rallying point of the schismatical wor- 
ship of the Samaritans. Unlike the Onias temple in 
Egypt, it had been a claimant for the sole right of 
existence. It was a defiant and intolerant rival of the 
sanctuary at Jerusalem. The day of its destruction 
was, therefore, a day of great rejoicing in Judea. It 
was also a fateful day for the Samaritans themselves, 
for it took from them the very centre and support of 
their religious life, and although they continued for 
many years their separate worship, a shadow then fell 
upon them which only deepened with time. 

104. The southern border of the land yet needed 
attention, since along it an ancient and persistent 
enemy, the Idumeans, held possession. Judas Mac- 
cabeus had been compelled to war against them be- 
cause of their determined enmity, and Hyrcanus now 
felt himself strong enough to put an end to their 
aggressions. He captured Marissa and Adora, and 
was soon afterward in a position to offer the Idumeans 
the choice of exile, or the acceptance of Judaism, 
by submitting to circumcision and the obligations of 
the law. They were so anxious to remain "in the 
country of their forefathers " that they took the latter 
alternative and were circumcised (Ant. xiii. 9, 1). 
This was a high-handed method of conquest, and " the 
Judeans soon found to their painful cost how danger- 
ous it is to allow religious zeal to degenerate into the 
spirit of arbitrary conversion. The enforced union of 
the sons of Edom with the sons of Jacob was fraught 
with disaster to the latter. It was through the Idu- 
means and the Romans that the Hasmonean dynasty 
was overthrown and the Judean nation destroyed" 


105. Hyrcanus now had a season of rest from mili- 
tary expeditions. He ruled in undisturbed possession 
over a comparatively large and prosperous kingdom. 
Numerous copper coins attest the independence of the 
nation and the honored position of Hyrcanus, for he 
is the first Jewish prince whose name was stamped 
upon them. As far as his foreign relations were con- 
cerned, he would have passed all the remainder of his 
days in peace had it not been for the Samaritans, who 
were restless under Jewish control. At the bidding 
of the Syrian kings, they had wronged the Idumean 
settlers whom Hyrcanus had planted in Samaria (Ant. 
xiii. 10, 2). He determined to teach them a lesson, 
and laid siege to the city of Samaria. A trench and 
a double wall were carried around the city and the 
conduct of the siege committed to his sons, Antigonus 
and Aristobulus. The Samaritans first appealed to 
Antiochus Cyzicenus, who tried to help them, but he 
was defeated and pursued as far as Scythopolis. As 
their distress became desperate, they called again upon 
Antiochus, who procured further help from Ptolemy 
Lathurus, and with these forces devastated the country 
in the hope of forcing Hyrcanus to raise the siege. 
Antiochus again failed and then left two of his gen- 
erals to carry on the campaign. One of these proved 
to be a rash leader and was defeated; the other, a 
traitor, who, from love of money, betrayed Scythopolis 
and other places near it to the Jews. Thus ended all' 
hope for Samaria. The city capitulated and was 
utterly destroyed. These victories carried the north- 
ern boundary of the kingdom to a line running from 
Mount Carmel on the west to Scythopolis and the 
Jordan on the east (Ant. xiii. 10, 2, 3). Well might 


Hyrcanus claim the honor which the nation as a whole 
was ready to give him and which history has declared 
his due. A glance back over the years to the time 
when Judas fled to the mountains, and when only the 
caves and fastnesses were safe dwelling-places for 
the faithful, reveals what had been gained. Now 
Idumea, a large part of the coast line, Samaria, and 
the eastern bank of the Jordan were subject to the court 
at Jerusalem. Judea had become a state worthy of 
respect among the nations. 




106. All this expansion of territory involved wider 
interests of a secular character. Men, measures, and 
means were required for its supervision and care. 
To be a high-priest giving undivided attention to re- 
ligious duties was one thing ; it was quite another to 
have joined to one's high-priestly functions the ad- 
ministration of an extended and diversified kingdom. 
We have already seen how the ambition for religious 
freedom merged into the larger and more worldly am- 
bition for political independence. This change brought 
about inevitably a state of mind which, while not deny- 
ing the purpose and value of the law, gave room and, 
indeed, preference to interests that were not purely 
legal. Alliances with foreign powers, the acquisition 
of strategic strongholds in order to open highways 
to Jerusalem, the subjugation of contiguous, hostile 
provinces for the same reason, — all had a religious 
bearing. Church and state were one in Judea. Fur- 
thermore, these achievements also affected such worldly 
interests as trade, home industry, military service, and 
diplomacy. In so far as life under the law insisted 
upon attention only to the ritual of worship, ceremo- 
nial purification, and the study of the law itself, it was 
out of sympathy with statecraft, except in so far as 
this might be indispensable to the attainment of these 


purely religious aims. A government existent solely 
for the purpose of protecting and furthering religious 
interests, and for guarding and promoting the inter- 
pretation of the law, was the ideal of the Hasideans. 
They were heart and soul with Judas and Jonathan in 
all their courageous struggles toward the establishment 
of such a protecting and fostering power in Judea. To 
them all the religious interests of the nation were for 
a time supreme; but as the Jewish armies were suc- 
cessful and the interests of Judea widened in the 
dawning independence, new ambitions filled the hearts 
of the Hasmonean princes, while the Hasideans drew 
back. They could not and would not follow the Mac- 
cabean leaders in their endeavors for political suprem- 
acy and political freedom. These were beyond the 
bounds of their ideals. They gave up the sword to 
take again the roll and the stylus and measure- all 
duties and ambitions by the standard of the law. 
Slowly and surely the breach widened between these 
zealous "separatists "and the rulers of the state. 

107. The name " Pharisees " first appears in Jona- 
than's time, and it was in his reign that the forward 
movement toward political independence made rapid 
strides (Ant. xiii. 5, 9). The two facts have an inner 
connection. Much had been done by both Jonathan and 
Simon of which the Pharisees could not approve, and 
the secularizing policy of Hyrcanus brought matters to 
a crisis. To the party of the Pharisees the high-priest- 
hood of these successive princes must have been very 
offensive, for the Hasmoneans even though possibly con- 
nected with Aaron through the sons of Joarib were not 
in the direct line of descent ; and when in the estimate 
of Hyrcanus the glory of his political sovereignty was 


greater than his high-priestly honor, the time for open 
and public disapproval came. The party of the Phar- 
isees stepped out into the light of history and became 
one of the most potent factors in the destiny of the 
nation. Their power lay in their religious zeal, which 
commended them to the people. Their earnest, punc- 
tilious endeavor to observe completely the require- 
ments of the law and the traditions kept before the 
eyes of the people the ideal which God demanded of 
every Israelite. They embodied the spirit of that 
Judaism which came into being through the teachings 
of the scribes. Hence, though they were in their own 
attitude far from democratic, they were in reality the 
spiritual guides of the people. From these facts it is 
evident that the Pharisees were not a political party. 
It was only the exigencies of the times that brought 
them into political relations. They opposed one leader 
and sided with another ; but the determining issue was 
ever the requirement of the law. 

108. In their doctrine of Providence, they found 
support for their standard of action. The destiny of 
the state, as of the individual, was independent of 
human effort. It was in the hands of God. Man is, 
indeed, responsible for the moral quality of his actions, 
but the outcome of human activity is beyond him. 
God is omnipotent, yet man is so far free as to be re- 
sponsible for his conduct. The mystery of this they 
did not attempt to resolve, but they put strong empha- 
sis upon the guiding and determining power of God 
(Ant. xiii. 5, 9; xviii. 1-3; J. W. ii. 8, 14), hence 
" vain was the war horse and useless the mighty host 
of battle, but God's eye kept watch over his faithful 
ones to rescue them from death." Such a doctrine of 


God's watchful care had had splendid demonstrations 
in the success of Israel against the armies of Syria, but 
it was no easier then than now to harmonize it with 
the inequalities and apparent injustice of life, and so 
the Pharisees looked to the life after death for the ad- 
justment of present limitations and wrongs. 

109. In their teaching regarding the future life, they 
pressed with earnestness the teaching of individual ret- 
ribution (Ant. xviii. 1, 3; J. W. ii. 8, 14). In that 
other world the righteous soul shall have its reward 
and the wicked shall meet the consequences of its 
wrong-doing. In this significant doctrine they were 
the representatives of the genuine Judaism of their 
own and of later times. Already the Book of Daniel 
had declared that "many of them that sleep in the 
dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life 
and some to shame and everlasting contempt " (Dan. 
xii. 2), and the writer of the Book of Enoch, whose pur- 
pose was likewise to bring comfort and cheer to the 
struggling few of the days of the Maccabean uprising, 
presents a like conception of future adjustments (90, 
20-26, 33). They also had part in the Messianic ex- 
pectations which were revived in the days of the Mac- 
cabees, and which became the theme of apocalypse, 
and the hope of the individual as well as of the nation. 
Here, too, their conceptions determined their attitude 
toward the state. When one remembers that in the 
fulfilment of the law, and in their bright hopes for the 
future, are compassed the vital factors of the religion 
of their day, it becomes clear why and how the Phari- 
sees secured and kept the spiritual leadership of the 
people down through Roman and Herodian times. 
The externality and formality which resulted from the 


attempt to satisfy the law, and the nationalistic con- 
ception which gathered about the thought of the Mes- 
siah, gave Jesus occasion for stern denunciation, but, 
after all, at the word of the Pharisees, the people hur- 
ried him off to crucifixion. 

110. Over against the Pharisees stood the Sadducees. 
As an organized party they too were an outcome of the 
Maccabean struggles and triumphs. They, also, had 
been vitally interested in the success of Judaism, but be- 
cause of their ambitions and duties they did not give 
such close attention to the requirements of the hour as 
did their opponents. It is not probable that at their first 
appearance they had a fully developed philosophy of life. 
That came as the logical result of . their position in the 
community. They were, as Josephus tells us, of the 
aristocratic class. They had been at the head of affairs 
in the state, had come into contact with foreign ideas, 
and had amassed wealth (Ant. xiii. 10, 6 ; xviii. 1, 
4). They put political interests first, and found in the 
nation's growth in power and influence their highest 
satisfaction. In all probability they took their name 
from the house of Zadok, an ancient and honored 
priestly family, and a centre around which aristocratic 
forces might gather. It is but natural that with their 
secular interests should come a worldly spirit. They 
had but little sympatlry with the rigid demand that re- 
ligion should be the motive and measure of all action. 
It is precisely the same general position which opened 
the ranks of the priesthood in earlier days to the in- 
coming of the most decided Hellenism. The Macca- 
bean struggle had driven out of the land all apostates. 
The Sadducees honored the law, but they refused to 
consider the traditions of the elders obligatory. In 


short, they turned their backs upon all that the scribes 
had accomplished either in the way of oral additions 
to the law, or in the development of religious views. 
Their faith rested upon the written law, and they could 
find no sanction in their accepted scripture for the 
doctrine of a resurrection of the body, or of retribution 
in another world, as did later Judaism. They therefore 
rejected both (Ant. xviii. 1, 4 ; J. W. ii. 8, 14). 

111. Josephus, who himself was a Pharisee, insists 
that they taught such a doctrine of free-will as to shut 
out all co-operation of Divine Providence in human 
activity and to leave man entirely the arbiter of his 
own course and destiny (Ant. xiii. 5, 9 ; J. W. ii. 8, 
14). It has been rightly questioned whether this is just 
the truth. The Old Testament does not so clearly 
teach immortality and individual retribution, in the 
Pharisaic interpretation of them, as to make the Sad- 
ducees contradict the authority on which they relied 
in denying these doctrines; but the same cannot be 
said of the denial of Providence. That teaching is 
plainly enforced in the Old Testament. How could 
they reject it altogether ? Is not the truth rather that 
they gave emphasis to human freedom as against the 
overstatements by the Pharisees respecting God's care 
and guidance ? " God helps those who help them- 
selves. " The Sadducees were ready to "help them- 
selves" by alliance with foreign powers, mercenary 
troops, and subjugated frontiers, where the Pharisees 
would have said, " Let God help ! " 

112. In their views regarding the existence of angels 
and evil spirits the two parties also stood opposed ; 
but here again it is probable that the disbelief of the 
Sadducees was rather in regard to the later and devel- 


oped forms of these teachings. Their whole doctrinal 
position gave them liberty to follow their desires for 
political power and worldly satisfaction. Hence they 
had a deeper interest in sustaining the power of the 
reigning prince than in maintaining the observances of 
Moses. At a later time they went so far as to be will- 
ing, for the sake of power, to accommodate themselves 
even to Pharisaic views (Ant. xx. 9, 1). They made, 
however, the open door through which Greek influences 
came back into the land, and, as another has tersely said, 
" the antagonism between them and the Pharisees was 
really a secondary version of the old feud between the 
Hellenists and the Hasideans." These two parties 
made the " inner contradiction " which at last left the 
Maccabean state at the mercy of foreign foes. 

113. While they were striving with each other for 
attainment of their ends and ideals, a third " sect " was 
quietly seeking the realization of the highest religious 
purity and holding itself aloof from all interest in 
either civil or social life. This was the sect of the 
Essenes. Its origin is one of the perplexing problems 
in the religious history of the Jews. The name prob- 
ably signifies " pious," and that view of them which 
sees in them a refined or superlative Phariseeism is, in 
all likelihood, the true one ; but some of the require- 
ments of their ultra-purification surely did not origi- 
nate on Jewish soil. In its most flourishing period the 
number of the Essenes was not large, — about four 
thousand, — and as a sect its whole career is of interest 
solely as a religious phenomenon. It did not enter 
into vital relations with the national life as did the 
Sadducees and Pharisees. In common with the latter, 
it was rigid in its observance of the law, and punctili- 


ous in its care for ceremonial cleanness. To secnre 
this ceremonial cleanness, it was organized into a com- 
munity with definite initiatory and probationary re- 
quirements for membership extending over a period of 
three years. All the members dressed in white, dwelt 
in special houses, possessed their goods in common, 
took their meals together, and exercised toward each 
other brotherly care in sickness and need. They were 
virtually a monastic order, sworn to secrecy regarding 
their peculiar doctrines. The day's routine was made 
up of prayer in the early morning, work in the fields 
or at their crafts until the fifth hour, purifying ablu- 
tions preparatory to the common meal which had been 
made ready by their priest-cooks, further work in the 
fields until the evening meal, for which preparation 
was made as for that at the fifth hour, then an evening 
of study, or of intercourse with strangers who came to 
them (J. W. ii. 8, 5). They would not engage in 
trade, nor would they hold slaves, and they condemned 
oaths, marriage, and r animal sacrifices. Much in their 
theology was the same as in that of the Pharisees. 
They surpassed the latter, however, in the emphasis 
which they laid upon the doctrine of Providence. In- 
deed, they were supposed to have a wonderful knowl- 
edge of God's future purposes with regard to men. 
Josephus gives us several instances of this knowledge 
(J. W. i. 3, 5; ii. 7, 3; Ant. xv. 10, 5). In their 
doctrine of man they differed radically from Jewish 
orthodoxy. They taught the pre-existence as well as 
immortality of the soul and denied the resurrection of 
the body (J. W. ii. 8, 11). Stranger than all, they 
prayed to the sun (J. W. ii. 8, 5), and were careful 
that its bright light should in no way be polluted. 


114. Granting that Josephus has given us a correct 
account of this strange combination of customs and 
teachings, the question at once arises, What was its 
origin ? Our answer really turns upon the trustworthi- 
ness of Josephus. If this is questioned, we must then 
seek to explain these tenets from a Judeo-Pharisaic 
basis. Such explanation is given by a number of emi- 
nent scholars. The break with the temple sacrificial 
system is then accounted for by the refusal of these 
purists to have part in its contaminated ritual, or by 
their higher conception of the nature of real sacrifice, 
and their prayers in the morning are interpreted as not 
to the sun, but as simply coincident with his rising. 
Unquestionably much of their ritual system of purifi- 
cation can be explained as extreme Pharisaism; but 
that the whole of it can be so accounted for is doubtful. 
We must either reject Josephus' description of their 
sun-worship and anthropology, or seek the explanation 
of them in extra-Jewish sources. Buddhism, Parsee- 
ism, and Syrian heathenism have each been drawn 
upon for this explanation, but the striking similarity 
of Pythagorean ideals with those of Essenism and the 
long-continued presence of Greek influences in the 
land make this explanation of its origin plausible. 
Pythagoreanism shares with Essenism " its aspirations 
for bodily purity and sanctity, its lustrations, its simple 
habits of life apart from all sensual enjoyments/ its 
high estimation of celibacy, its white garments, its 
repudiation of oaths, and especially its rejection of 
bloody sacrifices, also the invocation of the sun, and 
the scrupulosity with which all that was unclean was 
hidden from it, and lastly the dualistic view of soul 
and body" (Schurer). It was not Pythagoreanism as 



a philosophical system, but Pythagoreanism as a help 
toward the attainment of a loftier purity, that made its 
teachings attractive to these earnest souls. Perhaps 
the renewal of friendship with the Lacedaemonians, in 
Jonathan's time, and the reference in that renewal to 
the bonds between them and the Jews (I. Mac. xii. 7, 
10), which had been long-standing, may bear upon the 
question. Whatever the source of this stern ritual of 
purification, it made its observers respected. Their 
simple, orderly, devout life gave to the Jews some 
conception of the meaning of brotherhood within the 
limits of the nation itself. They exhibited none of 
the pride of the Pharisee nor the haughtiness of the 
Sadducee. They loved the humble, the feeble, and 
the poor and constantly ministered to their necessities. 
115. The gradual steps by which the Pharisees and 
Sadducees attained the prominence in which we find 
them in the latter days of Hyrcanus are unknown to 
us. As we come, however, to understand the spirit of 
each, it is not difficult to mark in the national history 
events which would lead them out and on. The Mac- 
cabean leaders are not to be identified with either 
party. Their sympathies were naturally from the first 
with the Pharisees, but they also stood in close rela- 
tions with the Sadducees. Hyrcanus had managed by 
a fair distribution of honors to avoid all open rupture, 
but the whole drift of his administration was away 
from the ideals of the Pharisees. According to the 
traditional account in Josephus (Ant. xiii. 10, 5, 6), a 
trivial incident brought affairs to a crisis. At a ban- 
quet given by the Pharisees, he took advantage of 
their genial mood to speak of his wish to serve their 
interests as fully as possible and to ask for the correc- 


tion of any mistake in his conduct which they might 
have observed. To the general voice of commenda- 
tion, which seems a bit insincere in view of the issues, 
a certain Eleazar made a startling exception by declar- 
ing that if Hyrcanus wished to be a really righteous 
man, he would give up his office of high-priest, assign- 
ing as the reason, that his mother had been a captive 
in the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes, — a charge that 
implied her dishonor. Hyrcanus was very angry at 
this open insult. He was advised by a friend from the 
Sadducees to find out whether this was merely an 
individual attack or an expression of general Pharisaic 
opinion, by asking them to declare what punishment 
was due such an offence. They replied, " Stripes and 
bonds," and the mildness of the sentence was inter- 
preted as a sort of approval of Eleazar's act. There- 
upon Hyrcanus openly joined the Sadducees. 

116. Two ways were possible to him for showing 
his opposition to the Pharisees. He could forbid the 
observance of all Pharisaic ordinances, as Josephus 
states he did (Ant. xiii. 10, 6), or he could remove the 
Pharisees from the highest positions of trust among 
the temple officials, from the supreme council, and 
from the courts of judgment. The latter was probably 
his course of action, for Hyrcanus came to no serious 
outbreak with the people, and a wholesale prohibition 
of the observance of Pharisaic enactments must cer- 
tainly have precipitated a rebellion. The presence of 
Sadducees in the Senate would indirectly secure the 
setting aside of these ordinances and yet avoid a direct 
conflict. Strictly speaking, the contention of the 
Pharisees regarding the high-priesthood was justifiable, 
though the reason they gave for the illegitimacy of 


Hyrcanus was utterly false. Indeed, the particulars of 
the story in Josephus reveal its legendary character, 
and the reason for the rupture must be found in the 
question about the priesthood. A deep distrust of 
such a union of royal and priestly power as Hyrca- 
nus represented was really the underlying cause of 

117. Fortunately for Hyrcanus himself, his days 
were not many after this unhappy break. He was 
spared the dread civil war which a few years later 
attested the bitterness of the antagonisms which first 
found open expression in his day. His long and gen- 
erally prosperous reign ended peacefully, and he evoked 
from Josephus the following tribute of praise : " He 
administered the government in the best manner for 
thirty-one years. He was esteemed by God worthy of 
the three greatest privileges, the government of his 
nation, the dignity of the high-priesthood, and the 
power of prophecy, for God was with him and enabled 
him to know and to foretell the future. Thus, respect- 
ing his two eldest sons, he foretold that they would 
not long continue in the government of public affairs ; 
and their unhappy fate will be worth description that 
people may then6e learn how very much they came 
short of their father's happiness " (Ant. xiii. 10, 7). 




118. Two distinctly marked forces are now again 
at work within the life of the nation. Their interac- 
tion is the sum and substance of the history of the 
latter days of the Hasmoneans. They bring back 
under other names the ideals and the affinities of the 
days of Judas Maccabeus, and carry on in sad and 
direful fashion the old struggle between Hellenism 
and Judaism. The Maccabean state has attained its 
glory in supremacy over outside foes only to fall into 
ruin under the disintegrating action of internal rivalry. 
The question of the nation has resolved itself into 
this : shall a religio-political or a politico-religious 
force have the mastery? More and more the people 
themselves were being drawn into the settlement of 
this definite issue. The heroic service and devotion 
of their leaders hitherto had held them in loyal fidel- 
ity to that leadership. Now they were called upon to 
decide between their civil rulers and their religious 
teachers, and that decision involved them in civil 

119. John Hyrcanus left the government to his 
wife and placed his eldest son, Aristobulus, in the 
high-priesthood. This appears as a peace measure, for 
it separated the civil from the religious leadership of 


the nation ; but it proved entirely futile, for Aristobu- 
lus, in order to have sole power, threw his mother into 
prison. Only Antigonus of the four brothers escaped 
imprisonment. He was given a place of honor because 
of the affection which his brother bore toward him. 
Aristobulus now proceeded to show his sympathies 
with the anti-Pharisaic tendencies in Jerusalem. He 
took the title of " king," peculiarly offensive to the 
Jews when assumed by one so clearly out of the 
Davidic line ; he gave place to the customs and concep- 
tions of Hellenistic culture ; and he carried on a war 
of conquest which resulted in the addition of a large 
part of the Iturean territory to Judea (Ant. xiii. 11, 
3). Schiirer conjectures that this territory was mainly 
Galilee, and in this is seconded by Buhl (Geographie 
des alten Pales.). If true, then the actual Judaizing 
of Galilee was first accomplished at this time, and we 
have another instance of compulsory uniformity of 
faith through the rite of circumcision. 

120. Aristobulus' extended dominion, however, gave 
him but brief satisfaction, for soon after his victory he 
was seized with a fatal illness. His dying hours were 
filled with remorse over the murder of his honored and 
beloved brother, Antigonus. Enemies of the latter 
had persuaded Aristobulus that he was intriguing to 
supplant him. At first the sick man would not believe 
the charge, but with suspicions aroused, he requested 
that his brother come to him unarmed. Should he 
appear in arms, he was to be killed. Antigonus was 
then informed that Aristobulus wished to see him in 
the glory of the new armor which he had just pur- 
chased, and, suspecting nothing, he went in full armor 
to the palace, where, in a secret passage-way, he was 


murdered. Short as was the reign of this unhappy 
son of Hyrcanus, — one year in length, 105-104 B. C, 
— it was productive of great mischief in undoing much 
for which the Maccabees had suffered and struggled. 
The very sobriquet by which he was known, " Phil- 
Hellene," marks his reversal of the purposes of Judas 
and Jonathan and accounts for his favorable reputa- 
tion among the Greeks, while the Pharisees could see 
in him little that was good. 

121. Bad as he was in the eyes of the Pharisees, 
he did not compare in shamelessness and infamy with 
his successor, Alexander Jannaeus, the third son of 
Hyrcanus. The promise of the man must have 
appeared early in the boy, for his father so disliked 
him that he sent him to Galilee, where he remained 
until Hyrcanus died. Aristobulus also feared the 
young man and kept him in prison. He was released 
only after the death of Aristobulus, then married the 
latter's widow and was given the kingship in 104 b. c. 
For twenty-six years he fought, intrigued, and mur- 
dered in the pursuit of his selfish ambitions and won 
for himself a place among the reprobates of Jewish 
history. When he came to power, all of western 
Palestine except a few cities was under the sway of 
the Hasmonean sceptre. These cities, all of them 
Hellenistic in character and population, became at 
once the objects of his ambition for conquest. Ptole- 
mais and Gaza had, during the recent rivalries of 
Grypos and Cyzicenus concerning the possession of 
Syria, declared themselves free republics. 

122. Jannaeus began his military operations by lay- 
ing siege to them, he himself taking part in the attack 
upon Ptolemais. The undertaking soon involved him 


in the most serious complications; for the men ol 
Ptolemais, though they immediately repented of their 
action in appealing for aid to Ptolemy Lathurus, then 
in Cyprus, nevertheless thereby brought him with a 
large army into Syria. He was only too willing to 
gain a foothold upon land adjoining Egypt, whence he 
had been driven by his mother Cleopatra. The inhab- 
itants of Gaza, together with Zoilus, who then ruled 
over Dora and Straton's Tower (afterward Csesarea), 
came to Ptolemy for assistance ; and in fear of the new 
force assembling against him, Jannaeus withdrew into 
Judea. He now tried the double policy of bargaining 
with Ptolemy for his friendship and at the same time 
of inviting Cleopatra to march against her son. Ptol- 
emy, on discovering this, turned with all his energy 
against the treacherous Jew. On the way to meet 
Jannaeus, Ptolemy captured Asochus and stormed 
Sepphoris in Galilee, and finally fought a battle at a 
place now unknown, named Asphon, near the Jordan. 
The result was overwhelmingly disastrous for Jannaeus. 
He lost a large army and placed his whole kingdom at 
the mercy of Ptolemy. The situation was desperate. 
Ptolemy hated the Jews because of their support of his 
mother in Egypt, and his march through some of the 
villages in Judea was characterized by shameful bar- 
barities. Ptolemais fell into his hands, and Gaza 
opened her gates to him (Ant. xiii. 12, 2-6). 

123. Only the timely interference of Cleopatra saved 
the Jews from the loss of everything for which they 
had so long struggled. With a large land and naval 
force she advanced against her son, who, taking advan- 
tage of her absence from Egypt, tried to make himself 
master there. In this he failed, and being driven out 


of the country by an army sent for that purpose by 
Cleopatra, he returned to Gaza to find his mother in 
possession of the whole of Palestine. The Egyptian 
Jews had been faithful to the queen through all this 
trouble, and when her Jewish general Ananias advised 
her urgently not to listen to the councils of those who 
would make Judea a dependency of Egypt, she con- 
sented and made an alliance with Jannseus. Ptolemy 
was forced to go back to Cyprus, Cleopatra withdrew 
to her own dominions, and Jannseus was again estab- 
lished as an independent ruler (Ant. xiii. 13, 2). 

124. It was to be expected that military expeditions 
which ended so disastrously would have mitigated 
Jannseus' lust of conquest. On the contrary, to its 
consuming desires was now added the passion for 
revenge, and once more he gathered mercenary troops 
for an expedition to the east of the Jordan and into 
Philistia. Gadara was taken after a siege of ten 
months, and then Amathus, a strong fortress near the 
Jordan. In this region he lost through carelessness, 
which gave the enemy an opportunity for a sudden 
attack, ten thousand men and all his camp equipment; 
but he was able, notwithstanding, to continue his march 
into the land of the Philistines, where he seized Raphia 
and Anthedon, and, after a year's siege, Gaza, whose 
gates were opened to him by treachery, and whose 
streets, as the result of the fury of revenge and de- 
spair, ran blood (Ant. xiii. 1 3, 3). 

125. Nine years were spent in these expeditions, 
which fully absorbed the attention of Jannasus. He 
had little time for the consideration of internal affairs, 
and the development of party differences is, for this 
period, in a measure obscured. Certain recorded facts, 


however, cast some light upon the progress of this 
inner antagonism. Alexandra, the wife of Jannseus, 
was an ardent supporter of the Pharisees, and Simon 
ben Shatach, her brother, a leader among them, was 
in honor at court because of his relationship to Alex- 
andra. The Sadducees were undoubtedly in the 
majority in the supreme council after the disruption 
between Hyrcanus and the Pharisees, and Gratz con- 
jectures that part of Simon's mission was to effect a 
change in the council and through royal influence to 
bring the Pharisees again into power. Whether or 
not this was actually accomplished, it is certain that 
Pharisaic influence was strengthened from within, 
while the whole policy of Janneeus was from with- 
out intensifying its antagonism against him. He was 
a warrior, not from necessity, as was Judas, but from 
choice, and his presence in the temple as high-priest 
was most offensive. When, therefore, he presumed to 
ignore as of very small importance one of the Phari- 
saic regulations regarding the ritual, and at the Feast 
of Tabernacles poured the water, the symbol of fruit- 
fulness, not upon the altar, but on the ground at his 
feet, the long pent-up feelings of the worshippers 
broke forth. They hurled at him as an expression 
of their contempt the citrons which they had in their 
hands, reviled him as descended from a woman who 
had been a captive, and shouted that he was unworthy 
of the priesthood. To save himself from the angry- 
mob and to punish them for their insolence, Jannseus 
called in his mercenaries, who slew six thousand men 
before the temple enclosure was cleared. He then 
built a wooden screen round the altar to secure him- 
self against like attacks. His bloody deed crystallized 


the enmity of the Pharisees. They waited only for 
an opportunity to make him feel its power (Ant. xiii. 
13, 5). 

126. That opportunity came soon. His love for 
war led him shortly after to make other incursions 
upon the tribes east of the Jordan. In one of these 
against an Arabian sheik, O be das, he was lured into 
a rough and dangerous region and then attacked. 
His army was destroyed, and he barely escaped with 
his life. When he appeared in Jerusalem, the Phari- 
sees aroused the people to rebellion, and for six 
weary years (94-89 b. c), the land was desolated 
by civil war in which fifty thousand men lost their 

127. When Jannseus tried to stop the rebellion by 
offers of peace, the Pharisees would listen to no con- 
cession less than his own death. That being, of 
course, rejected, they appealed for help to Demetrius 
Eucserus, then governor of Damascus. The armies 
met at Shechem. The strength of the Sadducees is 
suggested by the fact that in the force of Jannseus 
were u twenty thousand of his party." After unsuc- 
cessful attempts to induce desertion from each side, 
— the Greeks from Jannseus and the Jews from De- 
metrius, — a battle ensued in which Jannseus was de- 
feated. Once more, by the recklessness and incapacity 
of this man, the nation was brought to the brink of 
subjection. To be rid of him, the Pharisees would 
have undoubtedly accepted this issue, but the national 
interests prevailed. It were better to have a worth- 
less high-priest over them who was a Jew, than to be 
at the mercy of a Syrian king. Six thousand of the 
Jews deserted to Jannseus, and Demetrius withdrew 


from the country. The Pharisees were now exposed 
to the relentless hatred of Jannaeus, and "his rage 
was grown so extravagant that his barbarity pro- 
ceeded to the degree of impiety; for when he had 
ordered eight hundred to be hung upon crosses in 
the midst of the city, he had the throats of their wives 
and children cut before their eyes, and these execu- 
tions he saw as he was drinking and lying down with 
his concubines. Upon which so deep a surprise seized 
on the people that eight thousand of his opposers fled 
away the very next night out of all Judea, whose 
flight was only terminated by Alexander's death" 
(J. W. i. 36, Ant. xiii. 14, 2). After this there was 
no more trouble from the Pharisees, but Jannaeus 
obtained the contemptuous sobriquet " Son of a Thra- 
cian ; " that is, a savage. 

128. At this time there was serious trouble all around 
the borders of the Jewish kingdom. The empire of 
the Seleucidae was in its death struggle, and the 
power of the Arabian king, Aretas, was assuming 
dangerous proportions. Rivals for the Syrian throne 
were either courting or resisting the influence of the 
Arab sheiks. These complications involved Jannaeus 
in a brief war with Antiochus XII., who attempted to 
pass through Judea to Arabia. A wall and trench 
were carried across the country from Joppa to Ca- 
pharsaba (later Antipatris), to prevent the passage 
of the Syrian army; but the barrier proved of no 
value. Antiochus burned the wall and marched on 
to his death in the battle with Aretas. The latter 
was then called to the governorship of Damascus, 
and soon after made an expedition into Judea and 
defeated Jannaeus at Adida. By liberal concessions, 


however, he was persuaded to withdraw to his own 

129. Jannseus again was at liberty to indulge his 
passion for conquest, and he added successively to his 
dominions Pella, Dium, Gerasa, cities of the Decapo- 
lis, across the Jordan and eastward from Samaria; 
and north of these, Gaulana, Seleucia, and the fortress 
of Gamala. He was three years absent on these cam- 
paigns (84-81 b. a), and his successes won for him a 
cordial reception upon his return to Jerusalem. The 
conquered cities were almost wholly Greek; and if 
Jannseus kept to his early policy, they were com- 
pelled to accept Judaism or be destroyed. At last 
the hardship of war and the excesses of his dissolute 
life began to tell upon him, and he was smitten with 
disease. Even then he could not refrain from war; 
and in 78 b. c, at the age of forty-nine, he died while 
besieging Ragaba, a fortress beyond the Jordan (Ant. 
xiii. 15, 5). 

130. The weaker side of Phariseeism was revealed 
by the action of the party at his funeral, for it was 
owing to the unstinted praises which the Pharisees 
gave him that this much-hated man was buried with 
great pomp and splendor. He had, indeed, extended 
to their widest limits the boundaries of the Jewish 
kingdom; but its extent was its only remarkable 
feature. It was a conglomeration of diverse interests. 
Its unity was only superficial. Its glory was unsub- 
stantial. In a few years a foreign power was to be- 
come its sole master. The influence of Hellenism had 
grown apace. The coins of Jannseus were inscribed 
in Greek as well as in Hebrew. Sadduceeism had 
been allowed a large share of power. Civil and mill- 


tary interests overshadowed those of religion. One 
side of the mighty antithesis in the nation's life had 
received distinct and constant emphasis. The result 
was widened territory and external glory, but deep 
inner unrest and uncertainty. 





131. Whether, on his death-bed, Jannseus coun- 
selled his wife, Alexandra, to seek constantly the favor 
of the Pharisees (Ant. xiii. 15, 5), or to fear neither 
them nor their opponents, but to fear the hypocrites 
who pretend to be Pharisees (Talmud), it is certain 
that from the time of her accession until her death 
(78-69 B. a), the Pharisees had control. As Jose- 
phus states, " while she governed other people, the 
Pharisees governed her " (J. W. i. 5, 2). The policy 
of the previous regime was, in every possible particular, 
reversed. All exiles were welcomed home, prison doors 
were opened, and the places of responsibility and honor 
were given to those who had so recently been cast out. 
Simon ben Shetach came back to gain and exercise an 
influence greater than he had ever known, and, if we 
may rely upon the traditions, he invited Judah ben 
Tabbai from Egypt to come to Jerusalem and assist 
him in the great work of re-establishing, improving, 
and widening the power of the law. The high-priest- 
hood had been given to the indolent and incompetent 
Hyrcanus, eldest son of Jannseus, while the younger 
son, Aristobulus, because of his shrewd, energetic, and 
ambitious nature had been studiously kept out of 
power. As long as the Pharisees did not meddle with 


foreign affairs, they had their own way. Alexandra 
maintained a large body of mercenary troops and 
thereby inspired respect abroad. She had, however, 
little rise for them, for with the exception of an inef- 
fective expedition against Damascus, nothing of a war- 
like nature was undertaken during her reign. 

132. Both the glory and the shame of the days of 
her reign are connected with the Pharisees themselves. 
Under the direction of Simon ben Shetach and Judah 
ben Tabbai, ceremonial observances which had been 
neglected were restored. Notable instances of these 
restorations were the ceremony of drawing water from 
the pool of Siloam during the Feast of Tabernacles 
and that connected with the wood-offering for the use 
of the altar. Both observances were honored with 
an impressive ritual. Special attention was given to 
the revision of the marriage laws, and to the laws of 
evidence, and for the first time provision was made 
for the education of young children. A new elemen- 
tary school was placed in intimate connection with the 
synagogue. Hitherto it had been the duty of the 
father to instruct his son in the Torah. The require- 
ment " that the children shall attend the elementary 
school" (Talmud Jer. Kethuboth viii. 11) marks a 
distinct step in the progress of the Jewish system of 
education, and reflects its light upon the Phariseeism 
of the time. Another substantial and far-reaching 
ordinance established in this time was that imposing 
upon every Israelite of twenty years of age and over 
— proselytes and freedmen alike — a temple tax of a 
half-shekel. The Sadducees had maintained that the 
daily sacrifice should be supported by private benevo- 
lence. Support was now placed upon a firm, un- 


failing basis. " As long as the voluntary system 
prevailed, it was suicidal to alienate those who alone 
were competent to contribute largely; but when a 
kind of poll-tax had been welcomed by the nation, 
every Sadducee could be excluded from the Sanhedrin 
with financial impunity and the whole ecclesiastical 
organization of Judaism was rendered independent of 
Sadducean grace or generosity " (Moss). 

133. Had the desire to obliterate the work and 
influences of the Sadducees expressed itself only in 
religious reforms and ordinances, the Pharisees would 
have shown themselves worthy of the confidence 
Alexandra had reposed in them ; but they could not 
restrain the spirit of revenge. They must have blood 
for those of their number whom Jannaeus had slain. 
One after another, beginning with Diogenes, the Sad- 
ducean friend of Jannaeus, was put to death, and a 
reign of terror began. Gathering about Aristobulus, 
who was glad to show himself their friend, the Sad- 
ducees sent a deputation to the palace, headed by 
Aristobulus himself, to plead their cause. In this 
they reminded the queen of their fidelity to Jannaeus, 
asked her to give them honorable dismissal from her 
service, if she could not stop the Pharisees, and, after 
suggesting their worth to her enemies, if finally 
driven out, requested that they be allowed to retire to 
the fortresses in different parts of the land. Aris- 
tobulus spoke freely his own mind, and Alexandra 
granted their request, sending them to man and guard 
all her fortresses except three, — Hyrcania, Alexan- 
drium, and Machaerus, u where her principal treasures 
Were " (Ant. xiii. 16, 2, 3). 

134. At this time a dark war cloud appeared on the 


northern horizon. Tigranes, the king of Armenia, 
with an army of five hundred thousand men, threat- 
ened an invasion of Judea. Alexandra hastened to 
propitiate him with costly presents, but was relieved 
of her fears by the sudden return home of the king to 
meet the Romans, who were laying waste his kingdom 
(Ant. xiii. 16, 4). 

135. The possession by the Sadducees of so many 
of the strongholds Aristobulus meant to use for his 
own purposes when the proper time came. The dan- 
gerous illness of his mother seemed the moment for 
action. He stole away secretly by night and per- 
suaded the commanders to join him in his attempt to 
seize the kingdom. In less than fifteen days seventy- 
two fortresses and a multitude of people had given 
him their support. The Pharisees, in great alarm, 
imprisoned the wife and children of Aristobulus and 
sought to counsel with the queen, but she was too ill 
to think of matters of state and bade them do what 
they thought best. 

136. Before there was an actual outbreak she died, 
in 69 B. c. Her short reign of nine years is spoken 
of in Pharisaic traditions as a golden age. To the 
Pharisees it was, indeed, a time of unhampered asser- 
tion. The Sanhedrin, which during Alexandra's reign 
was probably reorganized, gave them large opportu- 
nity for this assertion. To this august body she gave 
supreme authority in judicial and religious matters. It 
was also by her will that the doors of the Sanhedrin 
were first opened to the scribes, — an element destined 
to have an increasingly significant influence in the 
subsequent history of this supreme court of the nation. 
Nevertheless, these years were a time of preparation 


for that little reaction which came immediately after 
Alexandra's death. The last independent ruler in 
Judea had passed away. 

137. Hyrcanus II. came by right of succession to 
the kingship, but proved entirely incapable of holding 
it. Aristobulus defeated him in a battle near Jericho, 
and compelled him to give up to him both his royal 
and high-priestly rank. It is not difficult to imagine 
what changes this turn of affairs brought with it. 
Aristobulus was of the same mind as his father Jan- 
nseus. That insured the disappearance of the Phar- 
isaic majority from the national councils and an 
emphasis upon political concerns such as had given 
its character to the long reign of Jannseus. 

138. A significant name now confronts us in the 
pages of Jewish history, for it introduces us to a 
power which for one hundred years is to exert its 
manifold influences upon the life of Judea. Antipater, 
the grandfather of Herod the king, was appointed by 
Alexander Jannseus governor of Idumea. His son, 
also named Antipater, had, as it appears, succeeded 
him in the governorship. From his position as gov- 
ernor of Idumea, this second Antipater, the father of 
Herod the Great, had watched with keen interest the 
progress of matters in Jerusalem. It seemed easier to 
carry out his own ambitions with Hyrcanus at the helm 
than with Aristobulus. He therefore sought to per- 
suade Hyrcanus, by all manner of falsehoods about 
Aristobulus, to reinstate himself upon the throne. He 
also appealed to the Jewish people in the interests of 
justice to join Hyrcanus in this attempt. As part of 
his plan, Antipater had secured the support of the 
Arabian king Aretas, who was to receive Hyrcanus 


and reinstate him in his authority on condition that 
the territory and the twelve cities which Jannasus had 
taken from the Arabians should be returned. With 
an army of fifty thousand horse and foot, Aretas de- 
feated Aristobulus. Deserters flocked to the standard 
of Hyrcanus, and Aristobulus took refuge upon the 
temple mount. It is not easy to say which side of the 
picture, that of the temple enclosure, or that of the 
besieging army, is the more forbidding. Aristobulus 
within the walls is matched by an impious throng out- 
side, who did not hesitate to murder an old God-fearing 
man because he refused to utter imprecations upon 
Aristobulus, and who shamelessly broke their promises 
to the besieged by withholding from them certain ani- 
mals for sacrifice at the Feast of the Passover, for which 
they had paid an extravagant price (Ant. xiv. 2, 1, 2). 

139. Despite the strength of the walls protecting 
him, the fate of Aristobulus would soon have been 
sealed had not the success of the Roman army brought 
Pompey's lieutenants about this time within sound of 
the civil troubles in Judea. In 88 B. c. the Asiatic 
provinces under the leadership of Mithridates, king of 
Pontus, having revolted, Scylla was sent to bring them 
into subjection. Mithridates was compelled to beg for 
peace, but after a time renewed the war, which was 
maintained with varying fortune on each side till 
Pompey, in 66 B. c, conquered both Mithridates and 
Tigranes, king of Armenia. His success led him to 
the resolution to carry the sway of Rome to the banks 
of the Euphrates, and it was in the working out, in 
part, of this resolution that his generals were in Syria. 
While at Damascus, Scaurus heard of the siege in 
Jerusalem and hastened on to use the civil war in 


some way for the advantage of Rome. He was met 
almost at the boundaries of Judea by ambassadors from 
both Aristobulus and Hyrcanus. Aristobulus won the 
day, since it was easier for the Roman army to dis- 
pose of the Arab hordes than to storm the fortified 
position of Aristobulus. Thus Aretas was compelled 
to raise the siege (Ant. xiv. 2, 3). 

140. For a little time Aristobulus had undisputed 
possession. But Rome, with whom friendly treaties 
had been made, and who at a distance spoke such 
helpful words, now definitely determined to take a hand 
in the affairs of the nation. It was no longer a nation 
united against Syria that required help, but one di- 
vided against itself. In the judgment of the Romans 
a strong, steady government was needed to gain and 
secure the best results. Aristobulus soon felt the 
force of this, and lost no opportunity of strength- 
ening the good -will of Pompey. In the spring of 
63 B. c. Pompey himself came to Damascus, and 
three embassies appeared before him. Hyrcanus and 
Aristobulus maligned each other, but the messengers 
from the people expressed with unmistakable distinct- 
ness the desire for which the Pharisees had so long 
contended : " We do not wish to be under kingly gov- 
ernment because the form of government we received 
from our forefathers was that of subjection to the priests 
of that God whom they worshipped" (Ant. xiv. 3, 2). 
In so far as the Romans took away the independence 
of Judea and stripped the high-priesthood of civil au- 
thority, these petitioners gained their wish, and " the 
first and most important stage of the battle between 
the Pharisees and the Sadducees came to an end" 


141. Pompey promised to give a decision after he 
had made an expedition against the Nabateans; but 
Aristobulus, who had put on royal airs while in 
Damascus, was by no means satisfied and in mistrust 
prepared for resistance. Pompey turned at once from 
his proposed expedition and marched into Judea. He 
compelled Aristobulus to give up the fortresses which 
he held and drove him into Jerusalem where again the 
foolish man determined to make a stand. When Pom- 
pey appeared before the city, Aristobulus lost courage, 
went to the Roman leader, and promised, in addition 
to a plentiful supply of money, to open to him the 
gates of the city. Gabinius and his soldiers were 
sent to receive the money and take possession of the 
city, but found the gates closed ; and Pompey, in anger 
at the supposed treachery of Aristobulus, threw him 
into prison and prepared to take the city by force (Ant. 
xiv. 3, 3, 4). 

142. A division of opinion within the city itself 
enabled Pompey to get possession of all but the 
temple mount without drawing a sword. The fol- 
lowers of Hyrcanus looked upon the Roman leader as 
their ally, and quietly let him in. The adherents of 
Aristobulus, who h a d urged resistance, as soon as they 
were outvoted, seized upon the temple mount, cut off 
the bridge which reached from it to the city, and pre- 
pared for a siege. Pompey found himself confronted 
with a serious task. The only possible point of attack 
was on the north, and along this side the fortifications 
were very strong. For three months the Romans 
made strenuous efforts to open a way into the enclosure. 
They might have toiled much longer had they not 
learned to take advantage of the unwillingness of the 


Jews to fight on the Sabbath. On that holy day in 
the month of June, 63 B. C, a breach was made in the 
walls, and troops were hurried into the enclosure. The 
priests were ministering at the altar as though no 
danger were near. Many of them fell in the frightful 
massacre by which on that day twelve thousand Jews 
lost their lives. Pompey and his officers, out of curi- 
osity, committed the unpardonable sacrilege of entering 
the Holy of Holies, and were astonished to find it 
entirely empty, but they wisely left the treasures of 
the temple untouched and commanded the ministers 
about the temple to cleanse the enclosure and carry on 
the services. The leaders of the war were beheaded, 
and Aristobulus and his children reserved to grace 
Pompey's triumph in Rome. 

143. Now came the judgments which, one after an- 
other, made utterly void the great results of years of toil 
and struggle. (1) Judea was made tributary to Rome. 
Independence was forever lost. (2) Her territorial 
gains along the coast, over the Jordan and in Samaria, 
were all taken from her and placed under the over- 
sight of the governor of the Roman province of Syria. 
While the cities in these regions rejoiced in their free- 
dom from Judea, she became again a small and com- 
paratively insignificant province. (3) The title of 
" ethnarch " was substituted for that of king. Such 
was the outcome of the internal strife which for thirty 
years had been weakening the nation. 

144. When Pompey reinstated Hyrcanus in the 
high-priesthood, the Pharisees were in a sense satisfied. 
Even though the walls of Jerusalem were thrown down 
and the national honor was brought low, they could 
interpret it all as a victory. Judaism had gained the 


day. Yet they had no love for heathen rulership. 
Pompey had won their lasting hatred by his unpardon- 
able profanation of the temple, and they were accus- 
tomed to trace his falling fortunes to that presumptuous 
act. It was the overthrow of the Hasmoneans with their 
worldly policy and ambitions that seemed to them a 
just judgment of God. As a nation they had been 
punished, but that punishment was for correction. 
They had only one king to look for and that was the 
Messiah, whose glorious reign would give them suprem- 
acy and peace, with all attendant blessings. 

145. In the so-called Psalms of Solomon, which 
were written in the interval between 63 and 48 b. c, 
are found the conceptions and hopes of the earnest, loyal 
Pharisees of the days immediately following the fall of 
Judea under the Roman power. Through them all 
runs the thought of the righteousness of God, of the 
divine chastisement of sinners, and of the sure mercy of 
him whose promise makes certain the blessings of Israel 
in the kingdom of the Messiah. They themselves 
make no claim to be the words of Solomon, and their 
conception of the righteousness which should be the 
goal of man's whole effort, and which is to be the 
characteristic of the Messiah, is purely Pharisaic. By 
this standard the author measures the usurpers of 
David's throne and declares the justice of their fall. 

Thou, Lord, didst choose David as Israel's king 
And to his seed didst swear that evermore 
His kingdom should abide before thee. 
But in our folly sinners rose against us, 
Set themselves over us and abused us ; 
Those to whom thou gavest no promise by force have 
claimed itj 


They have not held in honor thy name, august in majesty ; 
But in their arrogance have placed upon themselves the 

But, thou, Lord, hast cast them down 
And taken their seed from the earth, 
In that thou hast brought against them 
A stranger to our race : 
In accordance with their sins wilt thou recompense them 

(xvii. 5-11). 

The saddening estimate of the corruption of the peo- 
ple (xvii. 22 ; ii.), is based upon their departure from 
44 righteousness ; " that is, the observance of the law. 
Undoubtedly among these " sinners " stand out promi- 
nently before the mind of the Psalmist the Sadducean 
Hellenizing party whose wealth and station made them 
lax in more ways than one. The only hope for all 
is in repentance under the afflicting mercy of God. 
These psalms will always be of interest to the theo- 
logian because of their earnest presentation of the 
doctrines of the Messiah and of the resurrection and 
immortality of the righteous. Amid the humiliation 
and trials of those days when Pompey polluted the 
temple and independence was taken away, the hope of 
the Messiah burned with a new and intense brightness. 
It seemed the veritable " foretime " to his coming. 
Hence the prayer: — 

Look upon Israel and bring to her her king, 
The son of David in the time which thou hast chosen out, 

That thy servant may rule over thy people, 

Gird him with strength ; 

That he may crush unrighteous princes, 


That lie may purify Jerusalem from the heathen, 

That he may cast out the sinner from his inheritance 

And break his pride as an earthen vessel, 

That with an iron sceptre he may break up all their sul> 

And destroy godless people by his mouth ! 

He will gather together the holy people 
Whom he will lead in righteousness. 

To him belong the nations of the heathen ; 
Who shall serve under his yoke. 
By the subjugation of the whole earth 
Shall he give glory to the Lord. 

From the ends of the earth shall the peoples come 
To see the glory of his presence. 

He is a righteous king 

By God with wisdom blessed to govern his people. 

His hope is placed in neither rider, horse, nor bow, 
Nor does he gather gold for purposes of war. 

Pure he is from sin • 

That he may have extended rule, 
And destroy all princes who sin, 
By his mighty word. 

God hath made him strong in his Holy Spirit 
And wise in helpful counsel, 
Full of power and righteousness. 

He shall feed the flock of the Lord ; 
He shall not leave any among them 
To be weak in their pasture ; 


In holiness lie shall lead them 
And there shall not be among them 
Any one arrogant to exercise authority. 

He shall judge in the synagogues the peoples, 

The tribe of the sanctified ; 

His words shall be as words of the saints 

In the midst of the sanctified people (xvii. 23-49). 

This noble picture, constructed in part out of con- 
trasts to the conditions about him, and in part out of 
longings for that nobler, better time when righteous- 
ness should " have free course and be glorified, " exem- 
plifies clearly the character of the Messianic hope as it 
took form among the faithful spirits of Judaism. The 
Messiah is a human king and ruler whom God will 
endow with special gifts and powers, fulfilling the 
highest ideals of both religion and government. 

146. Hardly less notable than the teaching regard- 
ing the Messiah is that concerning the resurrection 
and immortality of the righteous. 

They who fear the Lord shall rise to life eternal \ 
Their life shall be in the light of the Lord 
And never shall he fail (iii. 16). 

The saints of the Lord with him shall live forever ; 

The paradise of God, 

The trees of life his saints are (xiv. 2). 

The life of the just is forever (xiii. 9). 

With such hopes hearts were stayed in theae days of 
deep unrest. 






147. With the victory of Pompey over Jerusa- 
lem in 63 B. c, the Roman period of Jewish history 
began; its close may be and has been variously 
marked. If the period be made to include all the 
years in which the Roman emperors directed affairs 
in Palestine, and subjected the Jews to the imperial 
will, its limit is not reached even with the end of the 
second century of our era. If the limit be sought in 
an event which seriously affected the Jews in Pales- 
tine, there is still opportunity for difference of opin- 
ion, since the war of 70 A. D. and the more terrible 
rebellion against Hadrian in 135 A. D. were both criti- 
cal and fateful. It was in the year 70 A. d., however, 
that the great rallying centre of the nation, the tem- 
ple, was destroyed, and its demolition followed by a 
gradual withdrawal of the priesthood from public life. 
At the same time the Sanhedrin disappeared, and 
with it the Sadducean party. The nation as a nation 
then lost its highest religious and political privileges. 
Henceforth it was to have no vestige of political one- 
ness, even under foreign domination. Its unifying 
power was the law alone. Hopes for the future 
revived, but the Jewish nation was from the year 70 
A. D. a thing of the past. There is sufficient reason, 


therefore, for taking this date as a proper limit. For 
over one hundred and thirty years Judea was brought 
into direct touch with the Roman power, and, despite 
the relatively large liberty given to her, worked out 
slowly but surely her own ruin. The period is of the 
deepest interest, not only by reason of the changes 
which took place in the Roman world itself, and in 
consequence also in Palestine, but also because in this 
period Jesus lived and accomplished his mission and 
Christianity was established. 

148. The sources of our knowledge of this impor- 
tant period are the Jewish historians, the New Testa- 
ment, the literature of the rabbis, and the writings of 
Greek and Latin historians and biographers. Recent 
valuable work in archaeology and geography contrib- 
utes also its share toward a clear understanding of 
times which must always have their significance in 
their relation to the true, but despised Messiah. 

149. With the same general purpose and from the 
same point of view, Josephus, in his "Antiquities," 
continues his history from the Maccabean period to 
the outbreak of the war with Rome in 66 A. D. He 
is still apologetic in tone and desirous of commending 
his people and hiniself to the Romans. The coloring 
which this desire gives to his views must always be 
carefully noted. The history varies in fulness and 
detail with different parts of the period. The reason 
is apparently in the character of the sources upon 
which he depended. Strabo and Nicolas of Damascus 
supply him with most of his material for the earlier 
part of the period; the latter is his greatest reliance for 
the time of Herod the king. For the time between 
Herod's death, 4 B. c, and the reign of Agrippa L, 


41-44 A. D., Josephus gives only meagre information; 
and then his account again becomes more detailed. In 
the Jewish War the narrative, as it enters upon the 
particulars of the war itself, has all the fulness and 
vividness of an eye-witness. In comparison with the 
books of the Jewish War (iii. ; vii. ), the later books 
of the Antiquities show less care in preparation. 
His persistent endeavor to make it apparent that his 
people were actually friends of the Romans, and in 
reality took up arms against them unwillingly, is a 
notable example of his coloring of the situation, and 
compels the acceptance of his assertions with some 
caution. The Antiquities were not completed until 
93 or 94 A. d. (Ant. xx. 11, 3); the Jewish War, at 
some time between 69-79 A. D. (Against Ap. i. 9). 

150. Our New Testament has a twofold value in 
its witness to the movement of events during the time 
covered by its record. It opens to us the institution 
and development of Christianity, and it makes clear to 
us the spirit and trend of the forces in the world all 
about the new and triumphing cause of the crucified 
and risen Messiah. It is true that a knowledge of the 
times of Jesus and the apostles is needful to an under- 
standing of the attitude and progress of both himself 
and his apostles. Conversely, their spirit and attitude 
interpret for us with unmistakable clearness the mis- 
conceptions of Judaism and the disastrous blindness 
of heathenism. The simple, graphic pictures of the 
gospels are true to fact in geography, customs, life, and 
national hope. They show us the scribes, the Phari- 
sees, the Sadducees, the Romans, and the people in all 
their characteristic features. In the dramatic story of 
the Book of the Acts, and in the epistles, we enter 



with the apostles the various centres of Graeco-Roman 
life all about the Mediterranean. Jesus himself " swept 
across the hopelessly darkened sky of Israel like a 
meteor flashing and vanishing; he had no effect upon 
the history of the Jewish people, and the fact that he 
did not do this, that he deliberately refused to do so, 
became, humanly speaking, his doom." The "flash- 
ing," however, revealed the woful mistakes of Juda- 
ism, the hopelessness of her most fascinating hopes, 
and the certainty of her failure. In the pages of the 
New Testament the central interest of Judaism is 
brought to test. The law is estimated and adjudged. 
Religious parties, temple ritual, and national interests 
are all allowed to speak with the accent peculiar to 
their time. Meanwhile a voice is heard, in whose 
prophetic ring, reality and truth, eternal truth, are 
manifest. From the days of John the Baptist at the 
Jordan to the dark hour of the crucifixion, there is no 
confusion in these voices. Judaism is true to herself; 
Jesus to himself. The antithesis all the way through, 
from the murmuring at the cleansing of the temple to 
the derisive shouts about the cross, is itself a revela- 
tion of the spirit that lived and moved in court and 
palace, school and workshop, field and camp. Nor 
does the antithesis cease with the pages of the gospel. 
The Judaism of the dispersion carries it forward on 
one side ; James, Peter, Paul and John, on the other. 
151. If the New Testament in its simple, vivid nar- 
ratives thus makes possible a clear insight into the 
character and insufficiency of Judaism, quite another 
view of it is gained from the pages of rabbinical litera- 
ture. Judaism here speaks in the language of her 
most approved teachers; here is the essence of her 


spirit. Under the phrase "rabbinical literature " are 
included the Mishna, the Talmuds, the Midrashim, 
and the Targums. All of these date from times con- 
siderably later than the destruction of Jerusalem and 
the temple, but as they gather up the teachings of the 
rabbis, handed down from generation to generation, 
they contribute a share toward the understanding of 
the Roman period of Judaism. 

152. The Mishna, the oldest codification of the 
Jewish traditional law in our possession, dates from 
the close of the second century A. d., and its composi- 
tion is ascribed to Judah the Holy. Its contents are 
almost purely of that kind of comment known as 
Halacha, or "binding rule," and its sixty sections or 
tractates set forth a wide variety of requirements. 
The Talmuds, of which there are two, the Palestinian 
and the Babylonian, date respectively from the fourth 
and sixth centuries of our era. They contain the 
Mishna with the commentary, which was in turn con- 
structed for its interpretation. This commentary is 
sometimes called the Gemara. The traditional inter- 
pretation of the law itself is the Mishna; the tradi- 
tional interpretation of the Mishna is the Gemara. 
The Talmuds are the Mishna and Gemara combined. 
Both Talmuds are written in Aramaic; neither covers 
in its comment the entire contents of the Mishna. In 
all of these the halachic method of explanation pre- 
vails, although the haggadic, — that is, the more enter- 
taining and edifying method of discourse, — is not 
wanting. In the Midrashim, which form still another 
class of rabbinical literary products, both styles of 
comment are found, and the interpretation is directly 
of the scripture text. The Targums, whose collec- 


tion in written form is also of late origin, owed their 
existence in oral form to the necessity of a translation 
for the people of the synagogal lessons from Hebrew 
into Aramaic. These translations varied in character 
from a strictly literal rendering to a free paraphrase, 
interpretative in nature. Lest these renderings should 
be considered of equal authority with the original, it 
was forbidden in earlier times to commit them to writ- 
ing. Tradition relates that when Jonathan brought 
out his Targum on the prophets, the displeasure of 
Heaven was revealed in a voice which asked, " Who 
is this that hath revealed my secrets to men ? " The 
Targum ascribed to Onkelos is a literal translation 
of the Pentateuch, while that of Jonathan is a free, 
interpretative paraphrase of the historical and prophetic 

153. The value of all these purely Jewish works is 
greatest for the study of the spirit and faith of Juda- 
ism. They present to the student of the times a mass 
of translations and expositions in which fable, legend, 
anecdotes, quaint sayings, and fantastic notions abound. 
What evidence comes from them for definite histori- 
cal situations needs careful examination. Fortunately 
for all who wish to make this "thesaurus of views 
from various centuries " serviceable, such works as 
Derenbourg's "Histoire de la Palestine, " Weber's 
"Judische Theologie auf Grund des Talmuds," and 
Wunsche's "Beitrage zur Erlauterung der Evangelien 
aus Talmud und Midrasch " offer a selected and sys- 
tematic arrangement of the materials. Thus arranged, 
these materials constitute a valuable source for the 
study of the inner spirit of the great religious parties, 
of the Jewish theology, and of those methods of hand- 


ling the Old Testament Scriptures by which not only 
"a hedge was placed about the law," but also a 
seconding was found for all that teaching which com- 
mitted Judaism to the sad way of its own humiliation. 
154. The real secret of that humiliation, as far as 
human history is concerned, was in the determined 
unwillingness of Judaism to accept the domination of 
Rome. The nation's death was due to a persistent, 
growing antagonism to its political environment. 
Hence we can fully understand the situation only as 
we study the relations of Rome to Judea as well from 
the Roman as from the Judean side. The character 
and policy of the emperors, the political necessities of 
the empire, and the means by which the unification 
of the Roman world was to be realized, — these have 
an important bearing upon the history of the Jews. 
For light upon such themes we turn to the biogra- 
phies of Plutarch, notably those of Crassus, Pompey, 
Caesar, Brutus, and Antony; to the Lives of the XII. 
Emperors, by Suetonius; to the histories of Appian 
(bk. xi.) and of Dio Cassius (xxxvii.-liv.); also to 
the History and Annals of Tacitus. These authors, 
it will be understood, deal only incidentally with the 
special history of the Jews. Their interest centres 
in the course and policy of the emperors or in the 
province of Syria, but the points of contact are easily 
discerned, and the relation of the whole to the part 
which Judea plays makes only more apparent the 
peculiar and perplexing problems which the Jews 
forced upon the Romans. Tacitus gives in book v. 
1-13, of his history a mere sketch of the history of 
the Jews to the time of the war with Titus. The 
generally contemptuous estimate which the Romans 


had of the Jews as a people is reflected in both Horace 
and Juvenal. Rome had no conception of the import 
of that religious development, which in its way was 
to be as much a preparation for Christianity as was 
the unification of the world under the power of the 

155. A study of the mental interests of the nation 
in this critical period brings to light two well-marked 
lines of development. One is devoted to the unfold- 
ing of the inner meanings of Judaism itself, — its 
observances, institutions, and hopes; the other to the 
bearings and issues of the presence of the Romans in 
the Holy Land. The traditions of the rabbis illus- 
trate one; various apocryphal books the other. 

156. Noteworthy among the latter is the collection 
entitled the Psalms of Solomon. There are eighteen 
of these Psalms, and in them is found the outburst 
of an earnest, overburdened spirit, which sees in the 
coming of Pompey an evidence of the righteous judg- 
ment of God (ii., viii.). The sins of Israel are just 
cause for lamentation, but the presumption of the 
heathen invader shall not escape God's wrath; nor 
shall those in Israel whose sympathies have been 
turned away from the law (ii., xvii.). But not all 
Israel shall be destroyed — chastisement will reveal a 
chosen people, the veritable children of God (ix., xiv.) ; 
over them God shall reign as king forever (v., xvii.). 
For them is reserved the glory of the Messianic times 
(xvii., xviii.). The numerous historical allusions in 
the various Psalms (i., ii., viii., xvii.) fit to the times 
succeeding the capture of Jerusalem by Pompey. He 
is the one "whose heart is a stranger to our God" 
(xvii. 15), and the Sadducees are they who are re- 


sponsible for the pitiable fate of Jerusalem. The 
voice in these Psalms is clearly that of a Pharisee 
who, while he will give no superficial interpretation of 
the dark outcome of the nation's internal strifes, will 
also emphasize God's mercy, and upon that base his 
clear, strong hope for the blessed days of the Messiah. 
These Psalms are witness to the fact that Israel, in 
these later days, could yet pour out her soul in the 
exalted strain of the poets of earlier times. 

157. Still another voice from Pharisaic Judaism 
speaks to us in the Assumption of Moses, but now with 
a different tone and with quite another purpose. By 
its teachings and prophecies we are brought forward 
to that time after the death of Archelaus, when the 
restlessness under Roman domination becomes impa- 
tient of the slow and sober preparation for the Messiah's 
coming involved in keeping the law and in repentance. 
More forcible measures are growing increasingly 
attractive, and the zealots are leavening the nation 
with their eager, irrepressible spirit. The book is 
an earnest protest against this spirit. The author, 
patriotic as he is, deprecates all appeal to arms (ix. 
2-6). He refuses to follow those Pharisees who are 
turning from their old position of non-resistance to 
active participation in politico-religious movements. 
His faith is fixed upon the all-decisive intervention of 
God (x. 3-10), who asks no help from an arm of flesh, 
but only obedience to his law. The book, which nat- 
urally divides itself into two parts, — one historical 
(chaps, i.-v. and viii.-ix.), and the other prophetic 
(vii., x.), — is in reality "the Testament " rather 
than "the assumption" of Moses. These were "origi- 
nally independent works, which subsequently were 


put together and edited in one " (Charles). Note- 
worthy in this product of conservative Phariseeism are 
its teachings regarding the future of Israel. The 
Messianic Kingdom will be ushered in by a day of 
repentance (i. 17), but God himself will punish the 
Gentiles (x. 7). The silence about any Messiah may 
be because of the growing martial spirit in the nation. 
As the Psalms of Solomon voice the nation's desires 
and herald the day which with each succeeding decade 
became the object of greater longing and the reason 
for a more fiery zeal, so on the other side this Testa- 
ment of Moses speaks its sober word against a mis- 
taken ambition and seeks to call the nation back to its 
more spiritual ideals. Its mission failed. The nation 
was too far down the swift current of events to turn 
back, even if it could hear the warning voice. 

158. The Book of Jubilees also, in all probability, 
from the Pharisees, belongs, with the traditions of 
the rabbis, in the first line of development to which 
reference has been made. The work is virtually 
a commentary on Genesis and the first chapters of 
Exodus, after the fashion of the Haggadah. It has 
a double title, — "Little Genesis," that is, a Genesis 
of less authority than the canonical book, or "The 
Jubilees," that is, the book whose chronological basis 
is the jubilee period of forty-nine years. The point 
of view of the author is revealed by his repeated 
endeavors to maintain the exalted, eternal character 
of the law. In this the spirit of legalism is clearly 
expressing itself. As illustrating the haggadic char- 
acter of its comment are the stories and fables about 
the patriarchs, and the attempts to carry one back of 
the accounts in Genesis by explanations which are 


purely fanciful, as, for example, that the serpent speak- 
ing in Paradise did only what all animals could do 
before the fall (iii. 24). The exact date of the Book of 
Jubilees is uncertain. Its chief value to the student 
of later Judaism is in its method and spirit. These 
bear witness to the character of that kind of teaching 
which both Jesus and his apostles had earnestly and 
resolutely to set aside. 

159. The later works, The Apocalypse of Baruch, 
The Fourth Book of Ezra, and the Testaments of the 
Twelve Patriarchs, contribute in like manner to an 
understanding of the methods, beliefs, and hopes of the 
Judaism which existed, not only before the destruction 
of Jerusalem, but which also survived it. 



160. While the nation was mourning the loss of 
its independence and honor, Rome was exulting in the 
successes of her great general, in whose triumphal 
procession marched the captives of nearly all known 
peoples. Aristobulus, the Jewish king, walked in 
front of the royal chariot, and in the train which fol- 
lowed were many of his countrymen. Saved, with all 
the other captives, from execution by the humanity 
of Pompey, they found a dwelling-place in a district 
of the city on the right bank of the Tiber and formed 
the Roman Jewish community, which in its descend- 
ants was destined to exert a mighty influence upon 
the affairs both of Rome and all succeeding nations. 
The Pharisees looked with undisguised satisfaction 
upon the great change which had taken place in the 
national situation. The masses of the people, how- 
ever, were not so ready to accept the new order as 
were their spiritual teachers. The national spirit 
lived on among them, and they were ready to seize any 
promising opportunity to get back their independence. 
They were taught with increasing emphasis that the 
Messiah would correct all their misfortunes, and thus 
were instructed to find their daily satisfactions in the 
earnest duties of religion, and in the quiet occupa- 
tions of the field or of trade; but when, at times, 


appeal was made to them to strike for freedom, they 
responded with surprising alacrity. 

161. Pompey's conquests, looked at apart from 
Judea's humiliation, must, on the whole, be estimated 
as a blessing. The blessing certainly was in disguise 
as far as Judea was concerned, but the rivalries of 
petty kingdoms, the heterogeneity of the Jewish king- 
dom itself and the thorough-going dissensions within 
it, gave small hope of strong, progressive independ- 
ence. A firm hand now held in check all over- 
ambitious princes, and made possible to both cities and 
provinces the development of their own resources. 
Upon his first organization of the entire Syrian prov- 
ince, Pompey was content to constitute it in part out 
of a large number of free cities with their adjacent 
districts, and in part out of petty princedoms depend- 
ent directly upon Rome. The victories of the differ- 
ent Hasmonean leaders had brought many of these 
free cities into subjection, and their liberation from 
Jewish control was to them a distinct gain. In this 
system of free cities the Romans saw the means of 
promoting Hellenism in the East. They, therefore, 
accorded them generous treatment. They were rec- 
ognized as the pillars of civilization, granted excep- 
tional privileges in the way of self-government, and 
seconded in all their commercial and literary ambi- 
tions. Where, from the calamities of war, only the 
ruins of such Hellenic centres remained, restoration at 
once began. So Samaria, Scythopolis, Dora, Azotus, 
Anthedon, Marissa, Gaza, and Raphia were soon re- 
built, as well as Gadara, Pella, and Dium. The 
organization of the Decapolis by Pompey is an instance 
of his treatment of Hellenic cities. Opportunities 


for commerce and for all human intercourse were 
greatly enlarged. 

162. In accord with these varying estimates of 
Pompey's mastery in Palestine are the different trends 
which manifest themselves in the life within its 
borders. Satisfied in the possession of truth, and 
with their hopes of a brilliant future, the Pharisees 
turned away from national affairs to the elaboration 
of the law. They gave themselves up to the work of 
rounding out and perfecting their religious ideals, a 
work which, as we shall see, had both a bright and a 
dark side. The people, dissatisfied with their politi- 
cal vassalage, made trouble for their new rulers, and 
repeatedly won for themselves the reputation of being 
exceptionally fractious. The Hellenistic centres all 
about the now-restricted province of Judea entered 
with rejoicing upon the development of their strength 
and influence. The history of the Roman period is 
the history of the interaction and outworking of 
these various forces, under the mastery of the great 
western power. Deep as is its interest when viewed 
as the last period of the nation's existence, it is all 
made more significant by the fact that in the midst 
of it Jesus lived rand Christianity was born. 

163. For a few years after Pompey's departure 
peace reigned in Palestine. The Roman general, 
Scaurus, did undertake an expedition against Aretas ; 
but the whole episode has interest more from the 
prominence of Antipater in it than from the result 
which was a treaty of peace with the Nabathean king. 
The crafty Idumean who had been appointed the prime- 
minister of Hyrcanus was virtually the man of the 
hour in Judea. The first manifestation of the national 


spirit was in the year 57 B. c, when Alexander, the 
son of Aristobulus, having escaped from the guards 
while on the way to Rome as a captive, appeared in 
Judea and urged his countrymen to put him upon the 
throne. They responded with an army of ten thou- 
sand foot and fifteen hundred horse. Hyrcanus was 
powerless, and only the timely arrival of Gabinius, 
the proconsul of Syria, defeated the purposes of 
Alexander. In an engagement at Jerusalem the Jews 
lost heavily, and Alexander took refuge in the fortress 
of Alexandrium. This he was finally compelled to 
give up with the other Maccabean strongholds, Hyr- 
canium and Machserus, which he had fortified. The 
first attempt to gain independence failed (Ant. xiv. 
6, 2-4; J. W. i. 8, 2-5). 

164. Gabinius determined at once to arrange affairs 
so that a second attempt would have even less hope of 
success. He razed to the ground all three of the sur- 
rendered fortresses; took from Hyrcanus all political 
administration, leaving him simply the care of the 
temple, and then introduced a change in the form of 
the government which should break up, if possible, the 
spirit of national unity. This was a division of the 
country into five districts, each of which was to be 
ruled by its own council. This council was, in each 
case, composed of leading citizens and was directly 
responsible to the proconsul. Jerusalem, Gazara, 
Amathus, Jericho, and Sepphoris were selected as the 
seats of these new councils. Another measure for 
begetting divisive interests was the rebuilding of old 
Hellenistic centres of influence, many of which the 
Jews had destroyed. Their restoration gave large 
room for a non-Jewish population. With apparent 


satisfaction Josephus mentions the fact that "the 
Jews were now freed from kingly rule and were gov- 
erned by an aristocracy " (Ant. xiv. 5, 4). 

165. Hardly had Gabinius completed his changes 
in government when Aristobulus himself, who, with 
his son Antigonus, had escaped from Rome, involved 
the country in another revolution. Many of the Jews 
flocked to his standard, but they were no match for 
the disciplined forces of the Romans. After a dis- 
astrous battle, Aristobulus fled across the Jordan and 
intrenched himself on the site of the fortress of 
Machaerus. Here he was captured and sent again as 
a prisoner to Rome. His children, however, were 
given their freedom at the request of Gabinius and 
returned to Judea. 

166. While Gabinius was away upon an expedition 
to Egypt, Alexander thought it a good time to try 
again to secure the sovereignty. Once more the Jews 
gathered about him, and before the Roman army 
reached Palestine again the rebellion had gained con- 
siderable headway. Alexander had an army of thirty 
thousand and was eager for battle. Antipater, who 
had been helping Gabinius with the Egyptian expedi- 
tion, was sent to persuade the Jews of the folly of 
their undertaking; but Alexander would listen to 
nothing but war, and, in the battle near Mount Tabor 
which soon followed, was hopelessly defeated (Ant. 
xiv. 6, 2-3). The result of this reckless effort of 
Alexander was to give Antipater a surer grasp upon 
the direction of affairs, for all matters in Jerusalem 
were arranged according to his wishes. Hyrcanus was 
becoming more and more the mere tool of his shrewd 
prime minister. 


167. Meanwhile a change of wide-reaching signifi- 
cance had been brought about in Rome itself. Julius 
Csesar, Pompey, and Crassus, distinguished respectively 
for mental power, military successes, and astonishing 
wealth, had formed a triumvirate with the express 
purpose of breaking the power of the Roman Senate 
and aristocracy, and directing the government accord- 
ing to their wishes. As the outcome of this scheme, 
Pompey, with the rank of consul, became, in 55 B. c, 
the administrator of the affairs of Spain, and Crassus, 
with the same rank, of Syria. Crassus was particu- 
larly anxious for military glory, and an expedition 
against the Parthians seemed the best way to secure it. 
The Jews now became acquainted with another sort of 
Roman. Pompey and Gabinius had indeed outraged 
the religious sense of the people, but they had scru- 
pulously kept their hands off the temple treasures. 
Eleazar, the guardian of these treasures, fearing 
Crassus, tried to save them by a costly present to him, 
and Crassus promised, upon the receipt of it, to touch 
nothing else. In shameless violation of his word, he 
carried away everything of value that he could find. 
Fortunately Judea was relieved from any further 
rapacity, for the ambitious consul lost most of his 
army and his life in Parthia. Cassius, his lieutenant, 
led back the remnant of the army into Syria, and soon 
found out that he had serious work before him in not 
only keeping the Parthians out of Syria, but also in 
putting down another revolt of the Jews which re- 
sulted from the robbery committed by Crassus. The 
decisive encounter with the Jews took place at 
Tarichese, on the Lake of Galilee, in 52 b. c. The 
Jews were defeated, their leader, Pitholaus, put to 


death at the instigation of Antipater, and thirty thou- 
sand of them sold into slavery. Thus within five 
years four insurrections expressed the restless spirit 
of the people under the Roman rule. In part this 
restlessness was due to the effrontery of the Romans 
themselves ; in part it was the outcome of that patriot- 
ism which was easily enkindled by some inspiring 
word from one of the old and honored Hasmonean 

168. In the year 49 B. c. began that critical period 
in the history of Rome, — the period of the civil wars. 
The death of Pompey's wife, Julia, the daughter of 
Julius Csesar, severed the last tie which held these 
two great leaders together and the struggle for suprem- 
acy commenced. Plutarch gives us the interesting 
picture of Caesar, at the banks of the Rubicon, weigh- 
ing the issues of his critical position and hesitating to 
bring upon the world the calamities which his cross- 
ing would involve. "At last, upon some sudden 
impulse, bidding adieu to his reasonings and plunging 
into the abyss of futurity, in the words of those who 
embark in doubtful and arduous enterprises, he cried 
out, 'The die is cast!' and immediately passed the 
river. " Soon after ( he was master of all Italy, while 
Pompey and the aristocratic party of the Senate were 
"beyond the Ionian Sea." It has been said that from 
Caesar's crossing the Rubicon down to the death of 
Antony, 49-30 b. c, the whole history of Rome was 
reflected in the history of Syria and also in that of 
Palestine, every change and turn in the Roman his- 
tory being answered by a corresponding movement in 
Syrian history (Schurer). 

169. Hyrcanus and Antipater had been careful to 


keep in favor with the subordinates of Pompey. From 
the changed conditions in Rome were now to be ex- 
pected only overthrow and death, if Caesar's first 
move was to be an index of his whole line of action, 
for he released Aristobulus and gave him two legions 
with which to set matters right in his own hand. 
Had not the adherents of Pompey poisoned the hapless 
king and at the same time beheaded his son Alex- 
ander, who could have taken up his father's cause, 
the days of Hyrcanus might have been short. 

170. On the 9th of August, 48 B. c, the armies 
of the great rivals came together on the plains of 
Pharsalia and Pompey was defeated. From the battle- 
field he fled to Egypt, where he was basely murdered 
just as he was about to step on shore. Antipater's 
conduct was now strictly in accord with the genius of 
his house. He changed sides. This easy method of 
getting on would have availed him but little had not 
his keen watchfulness found opportunities to make 
him really serviceable to his friends. Such opportu- 
nities now opened up to him in this way: Caesar 
followed Pompey to Egypt with a small force, and, 
instead of sailing away, as it was expected he would 
do on learning of the death of Pompey, he attempted 
a settlement of the trouble existing between Cleo- 
patra and her brother. These two, by the will of 
their father, Ptolemy Auletes, had been made joint 
rulers in Egypt, but the young king had been per- 
suaded by his advisers to depose his sister. In Syria, 
whither she went as an exile, she raised an army and 
returned by the way of Pelusium, determined to 
reclaim her share of the throne. Caesar, being fasci- 
nated by the queen from the moment he first saw her, 



at once espoused her cause. After many vicissitudes 
Ca3sar found himself with his small force in close 
quarters in Alexandria, since not only the city was 
against him, but also the Roman troops stationed in 
Egypt. He therefore sent to Mithridates of Per- 
gamum for assistance, and while waiting for his arrival 
was involved in several serious engagements. At 
length Mithridates appeared, and Caesar effected a 
junction with him at Memphis, where the Egyptian 
forces were defeated and Alexandria thus put com- 
pletely at his mercy. Caesar generously forgave the 
city, arranged governmental affairs to the satisfaction 
of Cleopatra, and left a strong Roman garrison to 
maintain order. 

171. If the account of Josephus may be trusted, An- 
tipater, on four different occasions, proved the sincerity 
and value of his new allegiance. First he brought to 
Mithridates, while he was hesitating at Ascalon, a 
large reinforcement of Arabians, Syrians, and Jews, 
and thus enabled the king to continue his march to 
Pelusium. Then at Pelusium he distinguished him- 
self by making the first breach in the wall and thus 
securing the capture of the city. Arriving in Egypt, 
he influenced the Jews to espouse the cause of Caesar; 
and, lastly, by hisrskill and bravery, he turned the 
tide of battle near Memphis and made it possible for 
Caesar to join the allies and thus to rout the Egyptians 
(Ant. xiv. 8, 1, 2). 

172. Such distinguished service could not fail of 
high reward. Upon his visit shortly after to Syria, 
Caesar gave to Antipater the privilege of Roman 
citizenship and freedom from all tribute, and also 
confirmed him in his position of prime minister to 


Hyrcanus. According to Josephus (Ant. xiv. 8, 3), 
Hyrcanus accompanied Antipater into Egypt, and 
Caesar's letter to the Sidonians (Ant. xiv. 10, 2) gives 
the credit of the Egyptian successes to the high-priest. 
This acknowledgment can be true only indirectly, 
nevertheless, Hyrcanus received a worthy share of the 
reward. Antigonus, the son of Aristobulus, appeared 
before Caesar and pressed his claims to recognition, 
but by a clever speech Antipater refuted all his pre- 
tensions, and he was ignominiously dismissed. Polit- 
ical authority was given back to Hyrcanus, and his 
position as ethnarch and high-priest was declared 
hereditary. The division of the land into districts, 
as arranged by Gabinius, was abolished. Jerusalem 
was made the centre of jurisdiction for the land, and 
in all Jewish matters the Jews themselves were given 
arbitration. Not only did they thus gain judicial free- 
dom, but religious liberty also was assured them both 
at home and throughout the East. In Palestine they 
were exempted from military service in the legions 
and relieved from supporting the Roman garrisons. 
They were excused from the tribute placed upon them 
by Pompey. They were allowed to rebuild the walls 
of Jerusalem and Joppa; Lydda and other places 
which Pompey had taken from them were restored. 
It was with good reason that the Jews, above all 
other foreign peoples, mourned a few years later the 
death of Caesar. Their lamentation was heard not 
only in Judea, but in Egypt, where he had confirmed all 
the much-prized privileges of the nation ; in Asia Minor, 
where he had guaranteed them full religious freedom, 
and in Rome itself, where his memory was held by 
them in high honor (Ant. xiv. 10, 1, 8, 20-24). 


173. There was, however, one serious offset to all 
these gracious concessions. Antipater was made more 
fully than ever the man of power. Especially was he 
offensive to the Jewish aristocracy, who viewed with 
increasing jealousy his growing power. Antipater 
determined, nevertheless, to make himself master of 
the situation, and in a tour of the country, soon after 
Caesar's departure, gave the people to understand that 
they could either accept him and have peace, or by 
rebellion bring down upon their heads the combined 
power of himself, Hyrcanus, and the Romans. He 
then appointed his eldest son, Phasael, governor of 
Jerusalem and the places in its vicinity, and Herod, 
his next son, governor in Galilee. 

174. From the very first appearance of the name of 
this young governor of Galilee interest in him begins 
and deepens. Restless and daring in spirit, of splen- 
did physique, and with a training and ambition that 
fitted him to command, he accepted with eagerness 
the governorship of Galilee, and immediately set about 
the deliverance of the region from a formidable robber 
band that for some time had been a terror to the whole 
country. In this he was completely successful, and 
won the gratitude of all the inhabitants of northern 
Palestine as well as that of the Syrian proconsul, 
Sextus Caesar. In Jerusalem, however, the affair was 
looked upon in quite another light. Herod had with 
summary justice put to death Hezekiah, the chief of 
the robbers, and many of his band. In so doing he 
had infringed upon the rights of the Sanhedrin, to 
which alone belonged the power to pass the death sen- 
tence. It was the opportunity for the aristocracy to 
assert itself and at the same time to check the ambi- 


tious designs of the Idumean family. They repeat- 
edly pictured to Hyrcanus the dangerous character of 
Antipater and his sons, and urged him to summon 
Herod to trial. At length Hyrcanus yielded, and 
Herod came to Jerusalem, but not in the garb of a 
suppliant. Upon the advice of his father, he appeared 
surrounded with a body-guard and with a purple robe 
thrown over his bright armor. The Sanhedrin was 
abashed for a few moments. Not a word was spoken ; 
out of sheer fright they might have allowed Herod to 
go, had not the celebrated Pharisee, Sameas, aroused 
the court to a sense of duty by warning them that 
they would simply insure their own ruin in passing 
over such defiance of the law. Recovering from the 
shock of Herod's audacity, they were ready to proceed 
to his condemnation when Hyrcanus, who had received 
word from Sextus Caesar to discharge the prisoner, 
adjourned the session and secretly warned Herod to 
get away from the city. Herod withdrew to Damas- 
cus and was appointed by Sextus Caesar military gov- 
ernor of Coele-Syria. He was not the man, however, 
to submit tamely to such treatment as the Sanhedrin 
had given him, especially at a time when he believed 
he had behind him the good-will of the people and the 
Roman governor. He gathered together his army and 
marched to Jerusalem with the determination to over- 
throw Hyrcanus. Only the most urgent appeals of 
his father and brother prevented him from executing 
his purpose ; and when he returned to Galilee he had 
the satisfaction of knowing that he had inspired his 
opponents with a wholesome respect for his power. 
Virtually the fate of the Hasmonean aristocratic party 
was now sealed. With this first appearance of the 


word " Sanhedrin " in Josephus comes also the last 
sign of its independence. The prophecy in the warn- 
ing of Sameas was to have literal fulfilment, and then 
the Sanhedrin was to become subservient to the powers 
in command. Though this prophecy of its ruin was 
uttered by a Pharisee, the Pharisees as a body had 
withdrawn from active interest in the affairs of state. 
Their attitude is expressed in the maxim of this same 
rabbi Sameas, or Shemaiah : " Love work, eschew domi- 
nation, and hold aloof from the civil power." 

175. In view of the fact that Phasael was in high 
favor in Jerusalem because of his wise and careful 
administration, and that Herod was both feared and 
respected because of his ability and power, Antipater 
had every reason to congratulate himself upon the 
strength of his hold upon Judea. Fidelity to the 
Roman power and a judicious use of opportunities 
would give him ultimately all he could hope for or 
wish. Suddenly, on the 15th of March, 44 b. c, the 
whole world was startled by the assassination of Caesar. 
Palestine was involved in the consequent political 
confusion and became anew the scene of rivalries, 
intrigues, and war. 

176. Mark Antony's decisive action compelled the 
leaders of the conspiracy to flee from Rome. Of these 
Brutus turned to Macedonia for help; Cassius to 
Syria, the governorship of which he had received from 
Caesar. He arrived in Syria to find a bitter strife in 
progress between the partisans of Pompey and Caesar, 
but the leaders of both parties were induced to join 
him, and thus put at his command a large fighting 
force. In order to get money for their support, he 
laid heavy taxes upon the cities and provinces. From 


Judea he demanded the enormous sum of seven hun- 
dred talents, and because Gophna, Emmaus, Lydda, 
and Thamna failed in their contributions, he sold the 
inhabitants as slaves. Herod, anxious as ever to 
further his own interests by keeping the good-will of 
the Romans, made haste to pay over his share of one 
hundred talents, and his prompt response gained him 
not only the governorship of Coele-Syria, but also the 
promise of the kingship of Judea, if fortune favored 
the arms of Cassius. 

177. For Antipater the outcome was far different. 
A certain Malichus, a friend of Hyrcanus, strength- 
ened the suspicions of the high-priest that the Idu- 
means were diligently seeking their own advancement 
and sought to supplant Antipater in his position of 
influence. He had not the means nor the power to 
accomplish this openly, and so he persuaded the but- 
ler of Hyrcanus to kill Antipater by poison during 
the feast to which Hyrcanus had invited them. It 
was too late, however, to stop the rising power of 
the Herodian house, as Malichus soon discovered. 
Furthermore, the dastardly deed took away a man of 
wisdom and power. There are two possible points 
of view for estimating the character and work of 
Antipater. Josephus praises him as a man of piety, 
justice, and patriotism (Ant. xiv. 11, 4). Bearing in 
mind the troublous times in which he lived, and the 
value of his shifting policy in saving the nation from 
greater oppression, it is possible to understand this 
tribute. Viewed from the Roman point of outlook, 
he served Judea, in the main, wisely and well. It 
nevertheless remains true that he was instrumental, by 
his strength and self-seeking conduct of affairs, in 


bringing his family far along the way toward complete 
supremacy in Judea, — a result which certainly did 
not prove a blessing. Malichus, while in the midst 
of his schemes to secure for himself the government of 
Judea, paid for his folly by death at the hands of 
assassins hired by Herod. 

178. Meanwhile matters were again coming to a 
crisis in the Roman world. Octavian, the nephew of 
Julius Csesar, was ambitious to take his uncle's place, 
and joined with Mark Antony against the conspira- 
tors. In the autumn of 42 b. c. the hostile armies 
met at Philippi, and Brutus and Cassius were de- 
feated. The successful leaders divided the sover- 
eignty of the Roman Empire, and Antony became the 
ruler of the eastern half. The departure of Cassius 
from Syria in the earlier part of this same year, 
42 B. c, had been the signal for the first uprisings in 
Syria, — one against Phasael, which he himself vigor- 
ously put down, and another by Antigonus, the son 
of Aristobulus, to secure the sovereignty of Palestine, 
which was frustrated by Herod. The two brothers 
were virtually now the masters of Judea. Herod had 
strengthened himself by alliance with the Hasmonean 
house through his betrothal with Mariamne, the beau- 
tiful granddaughter of Hyrcanus. Then came the 
news of the overthrow of Cassius ! The Jewish aris- 
tocracy determined to use this opportunity of change in 
masters to rid the land of these usurpers, and quickly 
sent deputations to Antony in Bithynia and later in 
Syria. But Antony had been the friend of Antipater, 
and Herod himself well knew how to make his plea 
effective. "Who governs the nation best?" asked 
Antony of Hyrcanus, who was with the delegation 


sent to Syria. "Herod and his party," replied Hyr- 
canus. " Then shall he and Phasael be tetrarchs and 
have full charge of affairs in Judea," declared Antony, 
and the other indignant delegates were bundled off 
without ceremony. Again Hyrcanus was stripped of 
all political authority. He became simply high-priest. 
For twenty-three years his harmlessness had kept him 
in the nominal headship of the nation. Not much 
longer was he to have even that honor, for in a year's 
time the Parthians came, and an entirely new order of 
affairs obtained in Palestine. 



179. Among all the foreign powers in the East 
with whom the Romans had contended for mastery, 
one had proved quite their equal in warlike prowess 
and valor. That was Parthia. Her terrible horse- 
men, whose extraordinary expertness in riding was 
matched by their skill in the use of the bow, were 
especially dreaded, and, as a rule, the Romans were 
content to repel their ravages without seeking revenge. 
Before the battle of Philippi, Cassius had sought their 
assistance, and although the battle was fatal to the 
republican cause, still those in sympathy with it per- 
suaded the Parthian King Orodes to make an invasion 
into Syria. This he did in the year 41 B. c, joining 
the Romans who were hostile to Antony, and occupy- 
ing all northern Syria. 

180. To Antigonus it seemed the opportune time to 
make one more final effort to regain the throne. In 
this purpose he had the cordial seconding of the aris- 
tocracy in Jerusalem, who were willing to risk accept- 
ing even the rule of the Parthians, for the sake of 
getting rid of Herod. Accordingly, he made large 
promises to the Parthian generals, to be fulfilled if 
they would take the government from Hyrcanus and 
give it to him, and at the same time kill Herod. The 
invading army marched southward in two divisions, 


Pacorus leading one along the coast, and Barzapharnes 
the other through the interior. At Mount Carmel 
Antigonus was met by a company of Jews, who 
wished to march with him into Judea. All along 
the way others joined him, until a considerable force 
supported him in the daily encounters which took 
place in Jerusalem between his men and the adher- 
ents of Herod and Phasael. Herod obtained the first 
evidence of the dislike of the people toward him, for 
the multitude which came up to the Feast of Pente- 
cost, held at this time, compelled him to retreat into 
the fortress on the north side of the temple area, 
whence he made destructive sallies upon the people 
encamped in the suburbs. In the mean time a body 
of Parthian horsemen arrived under the command of 
Pacorus, the king's cup-bearer, and Antigonus per- 
suaded Phasael to allow him to enter the city with a 
few of his horsemen, ostensibly u to still the sedition," 
but really to persuade Phasael to go to the camp of 
Barzapharnes in Galilee, there to arrange the terms of 
peace. It was but a plot to get possession of Phasael 
and Hyrcanus, which was completely successful; for, 
despite the earnest warnings of Herod, the two princes 
accompanied Pacorus and were put in irons soon after 
their arrival in the hostile camp. This was not, how- 
ever, before they had time to see that all Galilee was 
in rebellion against the Herods. 

181. At Jerusalem two hundred Parthian horsemen 
and ten of their nobles were, meanwhile, watching the 
movements of Herod. So successful had been the 
cup-bearer in deceiving Phasael that he was sent back 
to entrap Herod, but the news of the treachery in 
Galilee preceded him, and Herod, confirmed in all his 


suspicions, felt that his only safety was in flight. 
Secretly and at night he left Jerusalem with his 
future bride, Mariamne, and the members of his fam- 
ily, accompanied by the troops he then had at com- 
mand. His objective point was the almost inaccessible 
fortress of Masada, at the southern end of the Dead 
Sea. The march was beset with difficulties; and 
though Herod at first was stout of heart, he was 
with difficulty dissuaded at one time from taking his 
own life. At a place where afterward he built a 
palace fortress, named Herodium, he successfully re- 
pelled an attack of the Jews and finally reached 
Masada, which he put in charge of his brother Joseph 
(Ant. xiv. 13, 7-9). 

182. Antigonus was now master of the situation. 
His coins were stamped with the title " King " on one 
side, and " High -Priest " on the other. But he was 
not the man for the critical position to which he had 
been suddenly lifted by the Parthians. An excep- 
tional opportunity in the very support of these bar- 
barians was given him for winning the friendship of 
Rome. The latter power would have unquestionably 
ignored Herod in its readiness to secure a helpful alliance 
against these dreaded bowmen. Then, too, the inhab- 
itants in the mountains of Galilee were ready to uphold 
him, and among other places fortified Sepphoris in his 
interests. But, as has been truly said, " he was neither 
a statesman nor a general. His entire energy spent 
itself in petty concerns, and his overmastering passion 
was for revenge against Herod." When Hyrcanus 
and Phasael were handed over to him by Barzapharnes, 
he cut off the high-priest's ears to disqualify him from 
further service, and then had him carried away as a 


captive by the Parthians, and Phasael escaped his 
vengeance only by killing himself (Ant. xiv. 13, 10). 
While Antigonus was engaged in besieging Masada, 
events were taking place which were destined to change 
the whole current of affairs. 

183. After leaving his brother in charge of Masada, 
Herod turned to Petra to get from Malchus, the suc- 
cessor of Aretas, his father's friend, enough money to 
ransom his brother Phasael, whom he believed to 
be still alive. Malchus, from fear of the Parthians, 
refused to receive him, and the disappointed fugitive 
hastened on to Egypt. Here he hoped to find Antony, 
who had given himself up to the enchantments of 
Cleopatra, and in complete indifference to the inroads 
of the Parthians, was spending his days in a round 
of pleasure and dissipation. Again Herod was disap- 
pointed, for Antony had at last come to a realization 
of his danger and had gone to Tyre, the only city in 
Syria which had not been taken by the Parthians. 
Cleopatra offered Herod the position of commander in 
an expedition just then starting out from Egypt, but 
his ambition was in quite another direction, and, de- 
clining all honors, he took ship for Rome. Here he 
met Antony, who had hastened back to Italy upon 
learning in Tyre that his wife, Fulvia, had imperilled 
his position at home by a quarrel with Octavian (Dio 
Cassius xlviii. 4; Suetonius, "Octavianus" xiv.-xv.). 
Antony was moved by the recital of Herod's wrongs 
and hardships, and " partly because he called to mind 
the friendship he had had with Antipater, partly 
because Herod offered him money to make him king, 
but chiefly because of his hatred to Antigonus, whom 
he took to be a seditious person and an enemy to the 


Romans " (Ant. xiv. 14, 4), he promised Herod all 
needed assistance. This promise was heartily seconded 
by Octavian, who, before Herod's arrival, had been 
completely reconciled to Antony. In a meeting of 
the Senate Herod's case was so urgently presented as 
worthy of the support of Rome that a decree was 
unanimously passed making him king of Judea. The 
happy man left the Senate-house, walking between 
Antony and Octavian, and went with them to the 
temple of Jupiter on the Capitol to offer sacrifice, in 
accordance with the custom of the Roman officials on 
their entrance upon office (Ant. xiv. 14, 1-5). Per- 
haps no one was more astonished at the sudden and 
amazing change in his fortunes than Herod himself. 
To be sure, he was king only in name, but opportunity 
and energy might substantiate the name, and so, fore- 
going all that Rome had to offer him, he left Italy 
within a week after his arrival. This was in the 
autumn of the year 40 B. c. 

184. In the spring of 39 B. c, he landed at Ptole- 
mais and began the arduous work of conquest. Natu- 
rally his first anxiety was for Masada, which was still 
under siege, but prudence demanded that he should 
not at first stride across a hostile country, leaving 
enemies to gather in from all sides behind him. The 
plundering of the Parthians in Galilee had created a 
state of unrest which turned to his advantage, and as 
he advanced down through the country, his army grew 
larger each day. As soon as this northern province 
was brought under control, he turned his attention 
to Joppa, another strategic point upon his march 
toward the south, and one particularly hostile to him 
(Ant. xv. 15, 1). The city soon capitulated, and 


then the way was open to Masada, which was speedily 
and easily relieved. His success itself now became 
attractive, and many came to his standard for what 
they hoped to gain from him when he actually became 
king. Hitherto the Romans had given him but in- 
different assistance. 

185. He felt himself, however, strong enough to 
move upon the capital, and pitched his camp on the 
west side of Jerusalem. Had Silo, the Roman gen- 
eral, vigorously supported him, the capture of the 
city would have been an easy achievement, but the 
bribes of Antigonus induced the Roman to cause delay 
by setting his troops to clamor for supplies and to 
insist upon withdrawing into winter quarters. They 
even plundered the city of Jericho, where Herod had 
gathered for them a quantity of provisions, and then 
they refused to act until spring. But Herod himself 
took no rest. With a vigor and ingenuity character- 
istic of him, he subdued the large robber bands which 
infested the mountains of Galilee, and at the same 
time provided against any possible revolutions in Idu- 
mea by sending his brother Joseph with a large de- 
tachment of troops to oversee that section (Ant. xiv. 
15, 4, 5). 

186. While Herod was busy in Galilee, Silo was 
summoned to help Ventidius repel a first attack of the 
Parthians upon Syria, and as soon as this was accom- 
plished, a large detachment under the command of a 
general Machaerus was sent to the assistance of Herod. 
Double-dealing on the part of this leader made Herod 
very angry, and he lost all hope of proper help and 
advancement, unless he made appeal directly to 
Antony, who just at this time was engaged in the 


siege of Samosata, a city near the Euphrates. Both 
on the way and at Samosata itself, Herod's skill and 
bravery placed Antony under fresh obligations to him, 
and Sosius, the successor of Ventidius, was com- 
manded to see to it that Herod had efficient assistance 
(Ant. xiv. 15, 7-9). 

187. A speedy settlement of the contest for the 
throne seemed now possible, but Herod, upon his 
return, found that he had lost all that had been gained 
before his departure. His brother Joseph, contrary 
to express instructions, had risked an engagement 
with Antigonus near Jericho, in which he was de- 
feated and slain. Antigonus sent his head to Herod. 
The victory had again aroused the Galileans, who had 
drowned in the lake many of Herod's adherents. 
When one adds to these calamities the fact of threaten- 
ing unrest in Idumea, the outlook was dark enough. 
With his accustomed resoluteness, however, Herod 
began over again, and soon had Galilee under control. 
At Isana, a little north of Bethel, he gained the mas- 
tery of the whole land, except Jerusalem, by a deci- 
sive and bloody victory over a part of the forces of 
Antigonus. The head of the defeated general, Pappus, 
was sent to Antigonus in revenge for the treatment of 
Joseph. Only the coming on of winter prevented him 
from attacking Jerusalem (Ant. xiv. 15, 11, 12). 

188. In the spring of 37 B. c. the siege of the capi- 
tal began, and Herod followed the tactics of Pompey. 
The suburbs were destroyed, and orders were given 
for the erection of military engines with which to 
assault the north side of the city. While these were 
being constructed, Herod himself went into Samaria 
to celebrate his marriage with Mariamne, to whom he 


had been betrothed five years before. It was an event 
well timed to make his accession more palatable, if 
possible, for it gave him the advantage of the connec- 
tion with the Hasmonean house. 

189. Upon his return to Jerusalem, Sosius appeared 
with a large force, and the two leaders made a joint 
attack upon the city. They met with determined 
resistance, for the people were not only opposing the 
entrance of a hated Idumean, but they were hold- 
ing on in the lively hope that Messianic deliverance 
would be sent to them (Ant. xiv. 16, 2). Only two 
voices were heard in favor of opening the city gates, 
— those of Shemaia and Abtalion, — who looked upon 
Herod as a chastisement upon the nation for its sinful- 
ness (Ant. xv. 1, 1). Forty days after the beginning 
of the attack, and in the fifth month after prepara- 
tions for the siege had begun, the outer rampart was 
taken, and after fifteen more, the second. Then came 
the storming of the inner court of the temple and the 
upper city. The slaughter was terrible. The Romans 
were enraged over the prolonged siege, and in their 
fury they were matched by the Jews who fought with 
Herod. The streets ran blood; and it was only by 
entreaties and threatenings that Herod saved the tem- 
ple from pollution, — a deed which he knew would 
never be forgiven hiin. Antigonus, in his extremity, 
cast himself at the feet of the Roman general and 
begged for mercy. His tears and pleadings won only 
the scorn of Sosius, who, in ridicule, as though he 
were a mere woman, called him Antigona, and put 
him in chains. Nor was this all. He was taken 
bound to Antony at Antioch, and by the earnest 
appeal of Herod was put to death. As though he 



were a common criminal, he was first scourged and 
then beheaded. Never before had the Romans in such 
an ignominious fashion put a king to death. The 
noble house that for nearly one hundred and thirty 
years had wrought so much for Judea, ended in shame 
and contempt. " They wore the diadem of the king 
and the mitre of the high-priest, but no self-conquest 
had crowned and mitred them over themselves. They 
had come to think less of their country than of their 
dynasty, and less of their religion than of their per- 
sonal interests ; " and so they were carried out upon the 
tide of ambition into the ceaseless current of political 
rivalry and strife, to go down at last at the hands of 
the very power to which they had more than once 
appealed for protection. 



(37-4 b. c.) 

190. When the Roman army marched away with 
Antigonus as a prisoner, Herod's title of " King " was 
no longer empty. He was "the master of a city in 
ruins and the king of a nation that hated him." His 
long, eventful reign was a complex of brilliant achieve- 
ments and fearful crimes. His hands were never free 
from the stain of blood, and yet those hands made 
Jerusalem glorious in the architecture of palace and 
temple, and changed the face of the land by many a 
costly improvement. The very Hellenism which, in 
its extreme form, Antiochus Epiphanes had tried to 
force upon the nation, was in all its secular features 
established by Herod in various parts of the land, and 
that, too, without a single uprising. The theatre and 
amphitheatre formed a part of the attractions of the 
capital, whose court life and interests kept the city in 
touch with the outside world. Almost within sound of 
the solemn service of worship, in the temple, took place 
furious chariot races and the cruel, demoralizing fights 
of foreign gladiators ; while heathen temples at Paneas 
and Caesarea showed how like in faith to the mad An- 
tiochus this " Idumean slave," as the Jews called him, 
really was. Indeed, the sharp contrasts that might be 
seen in the life of Jerusalem were but symbolical of 


the contrasts in the character of Herod himself. He 
was intensely selfish and yet could be splendidly gener- 
ous ; he was strong in purpose, and yet the easy victim 
of weakening suspicions; he loved the means of 
culture and yet revealed the revengeful cruelty of a 
veritable barbarian. 

191. As we turn to the unfolding of the history of 
his rulership, it will be well to keep in mind the two 
guiding principles of his whole career : the safeguard- 
ing of his own supremacy and the strengthening of 
the favor of the Romans. In one or the other of these 
is found the impulse to his every action. "Uneasy 
lies the head that wears a crown." Never was this 
proverb truer than in the case of this last sovereign in 
Jerusalem. The success which he had achieved in the 
realization of his ambition to be king had been won at 
the expense of the enmity of the people, of the nobility 
in Jerusalem, of the survivors of the Hasmonean house, 
and of Cleopatra. In the plots and counterplots born 
of this deadly hatred, much of his time and energy for 
twelve years, from 37 to 25 B. c, was consumed. The 
people he treated with consideration, as far as their 
religious demands were concerned, for he himself had 
no vital interest in religion of any form or description ; 
but he dealt with all resistance to his authority with 
the utmost rigor. He was prompt, decisive, and 

192. Almost his first act after the Romans had gone 
was to put to death forty-five of the nobles who had sup- 
ported Antigonus, and then to confiscate their property 
that he might have means to strengthen his hold upon 
Antony and to gratify his own luxurious tastes. By 
one treacherous blow the Sanhedrin was thus struck 


down, only Shemaia and Abtalion, the Pharisees who 
had counselled the opening of the city gates, being 
spared. In general, Herod had little to fear from the 
Pharisees. Although six thousand of them refused to 
take the oath of allegiance to him, their voluntary 
withdrawal from political authority left him in a meas- 
ure free to work out his own political projects. They 
looked with increasing expectation for the Messianic 
day of deliverance, and had only haughty scorn for the 
presumption of the whole dynasty of the Herods. 
When the new Sanhedrin was convoked, a goodly 
number of them took their places in its solemn con 
clave, as did, indeed, such Sadducees as had accom- 
modated themselves to the new order of affairs in 
Jerusalem. The accession of Herod marks the begin- 
ning of a new phase in the history of these two great 
parties. His policy and procedure made impossible 
any longer open warfare, and they were compelled to 
satisfy themselves with discussion over mooted points 
of theological casuistry. In these discussions the Sad- 
ducees were no match for their learned opponents and 
were soon silenced. 

193. In order to have affairs more completely under 
his control, he took upon himself the appointment of 
the high-priest, and placed in this position of dignity 
and authority an obscure priest from Babylon, named 
Ananel. With this appointment began the long series 
of troubles and calamities brought upon him by the 
survivors of the Hasmonean family. Hyrcanus could 
never again fill the sacred office because of the mutila- 
tion he had suffered ; but Herod was not content to 
leave him in Babylon, whither he had been sent by the 
Parthians and where he had been highly honored. He 


was invited to return to Jerusalem and treated with 
much honor by Herod, who by his flattering attentions 
masked his real intention of bringing the aged Has- 
monean within the range of his own authority and es- 
pionage and of thus guarding against any possible 
demonstration in his favor. From him there was now 
nothing to be feared. This was not the case with 
Alexandra, the daughter of Hyrcanus. It was to her an 
intolerable outrage that an unknown Babylonian Jew 
should be appointed to the high-priesthood when her 
son, Aristobulus III., fair in person and of the royal line- 
age, had every reason to receive it (Ant. xv. 2, 1-5). 

194. She at once began to work out her design of 
compelling Herod to give her son the honor, and wrote 
to Cleopatra for assistance in bringing Antony over to 
the support of her son's claim. Mariamne, the sister of 
Aristobulus III., also urged upon Herod the rightful- 
ness of her brother's desire. Pictures of the fair 
brother and beautiful sister were sent to Antony with 
an evil purpose, but he feared both the hatred of Herod 
and the jealousy of Cleopatra, and so wrote to Herod 
to favor the young man, if he could do so without giv- 
ing offence. In the circumstances Herod decided to 
accede to the wishes of Alexandra, and in the begin- 
ning of 35 B. c. appointed Aristobulus, though only in 
his seventeenth year, high-priest. The appointment was 
in itself illegal, for Herod had no right to depose 
Ananel, whose rightful term of service was for life. 
Furthermore, it cast over Aristobulus himself the 
shadow of death. Alexandra, by her intrigues, had 
opened that fatal door into Herod's mind through 
which the darkest suspicions evermore had ready en- 
trance, and she was the first to suffer from her own 


rash ambitions. She was imprisoned in the palace in 
Jerusalem, and, on the discovery of a plot to escape 
with her son to Cleopatra, marked for death. Herod 
now waited for a suitable time to put them both out of 
the way. 

195. The jealousy of the king hastened the issue 
for Aristobulus. At the Feast of Tabernacles, the tall, 
stately figure of the young man in his priestly robes 
aroused the greatest enthusiasm among the people, 
and their hearty acclamations and expressions of good- 
will revealed to the suspicious king the danger which 
threatened him. A few days after, they were both in 
Jericho at a feast given by Alexandra ; and while seek- 
ing refreshment from the heat by a bath in one of the 
large fish-ponds near the palace, Aristobulus, under 
pretence of sport, was held under the water by paid 
servants of Herod and drowned. No one was louder 
in his lamentations than the king himself, and a costly 
funeral seems to have made complete the deception of 
the people (Ant. xv. 3, 2-4). 

196. Alexandra, however, understood the treachery, 
but, dissembling her abhorrence and hatred, secretly 
sought again the help of Cleopatra, who prevailed 
upon Antony to summon Herod before him to answer 
for his treacherous murder. It was a time of keen 
suspense for the king. If he failed to keep the good- 
will of Antony, his kingship was worth but little, and 
two determined enemies, Cleopatra and Alexandra, 
were in league against him. So uncertain was he of 
the issue, that upon his departure he gave command 
that Mariamne should be put to death in case he did 
not return, so that Antony might not get possession of 
her (Ant. xv. 3, 4). 


197. Antony was at this time, 34 B. c, in Laodicea, 
south of Antioch, making preparations ostensibly 
against the Parthians, but really against the Arme- 
nians. He was still under the fascination of the 
Egyptian queen, who was using all her arts to get 
possession of Judea. Only Antony's appreciation of 
Herod had so far frustrated her design. Herod well 
knew how much depended upon his appearance before 
his Roman master, and by skilful address and lavish 
gifts he won the day (Ant. xv. 3, 8). 

198. In the mean time rumor had it that Antony 
had put him to death. This false report encouraged 
Alexandra to plan, through the charms of Mariamne, 
to induce Antony to raise her to the throne, when 
letters came from Herod telling of his success. Mari- 
amne was as little rejoiced over this sudden change of 
outlook as was Alexandra, for the talkative Joseph 
had let out the secret about Herod's commands to kill 
her if he did not return. Herod, as soon as he reached 
Jerusalem, was told of the plans of Alexandra, and 
made to believe that Mariamne's knowledge of his 
secret command was gained through shameless infidel- 
ity. Salome, his sister, was chiefly instrumental in 
deepening the suspicions against his wife, whom she 
hated, and only the deep, abiding affection of Herod 
saved Mariamne from death. Alexandra was impris- 
oned, and the telltale Joseph put to death without 
even a hearing (Ant. xv. 3, 9). With the entrance of 
Salome upon the scene, we have the " three furies who, 
in the guise of evil women, with their ambitions, 
jealousies, and lusts, swept down from the first 
like harpies " upon the public and private peace of 


199. Antony had sent the king back to Jerusalem 
triumphant, but Cleopatra could not be totally denied, 
and she became the possessor of all the cities south of 
the Eleutherus River as far as Egypt, except Tyre and 
Sidon ; of a part of the Arabian territory, and of the 
region about Jericho, famous for its palm-trees and 
balsams. With no good grace Herod leased this last dis- 
trict from Cleopatra, and when she came into Judea on 
her return from accompanying Antony to the Euphrates, 
he had a mind to put her to death and thus rid both 
Antony and himself of her persistent scheming. While 
in Judea she tried all her seductive arts upon the king, 
but without success. Herod pretended to take her 
proposals seriously, and, in fact, consulted his council 
regarding a fitting rejoinder, but contented himself 
with escorting her with every manifestation of dignity 
and display to the boundaries of Egypt. 

200. Meanwhile a crisis was drawing near which 
was again to affect the fortunes of the whole Roman 
world. Rome itself was getting heartily tired of the 
strange, unseemly doings of Antony. His extravagant 
folly and Oriental airs awakened the strongest resent- 
ment, and when in 32 B. c, Octavian, his colleague, 
openly denounced him in the Senate, all were ready 
for action. When hostilities began, Herod hastened 
to support his old friend Antony, but by a scheme of 
Cleopatra's he was turned aside to punish the Arabian 
king who had failed to pay the queen his tribute. The 
purpose of this diversion was not so much the tribute 
as the war, which should so weaken both contestants 
that she herself might easily assert her power over 
them. It all turned out to Herod's gain, for not only 
did he, after several discouraging experiences, gain a 


complete victory over his enemies, but he was also 
saved from any direct action against Octavian (Ant. 
xv. 5, 1-5). 

201. In the sea fight off the promontory of Actium 
on September 2, 31 b. a, Antony's forces were 
defeated and Octavian became the sole master of 
Eome's destinies. It was again a critical moment for 
Herod. He yet believed in Antony and urged him to 
put Cleopatra to death and seek some compromise with 
Octavian. This the infatuated Roman would not do, 
and Herod resolved to support him no longer. It was 
in reality no difficult matter for him to change his 
allegiance. Already he had done it three times, and 
yet Antony seemed to understand him so little as to 
count upon his unfailing support. When, in addition 
to all other reports which came to Antony daily at 
Alexandria of the desertion of this or that leader, word 
was finally brought that Herod had also abandoned 
him, he gave up all thoughts of continued resistance 
and in the course of the year committed suicide (Ant. 
xv. 6, 7; Plutarch, "Antonius"). 

202. As soon as Herod's resolution was taken to 
support Octavian, he sought opportunity to prove his 
new allegiance. This came to him in connection with 
a troop of gladiators who had assembled at Cyzicus, 
and were waiting to take part in the games which 
were to be celebrated in honor of Antony's victory 
over Octavian. Upon the news of the issue of the 
battle, they determined to hasten to Egypt to the 
assistance of their defeated master. Herod forbade 
their crossing his territory, and they were compelled to 
surrender to the proconsul of Syria, who had held them 
in siege at Daphnae. Before, however, Herod could 


undertake an interview with Octavian, he felt that he 
must secretly guard in his absence against an attempt 
on the part of those around him to raise any rival to 
power. The aged Hyrcanus was really the object of 
his fears, not because he would himself make trouble, 
but because he was an Hasmonean and could be readily 
used by the people. Hence a disgraceful plot was de- 
vised to bring about the death of the aged prince. 
Hyrcanus was accused of conniving with the Arabian 
king and ruthlessly butchered. Among Herod's many 
shameless deeds this one takes high rank. It was as 
uncalled for as it was cruel, and deepened the hatred of 
many against him. 

203. Octavian was at Rhodes, and thither Herod 
journeyed, after having placed various members of 
his family at Masada for safe-keeping, and his wife 
and her mother at Alexandrium under the charge of 
his treasurer, Joseph, and a certain Sohemus of Iturea. 
These arrangements are noteworthy because of the re- 
sults that came from them. Herod put on a bold face 
before Octavian. His fidelity to Antony he made the 
very reason why Octavian should accept him. The 
shrewd Roman had other reasons of far greater import 
to himself. He knew Herod's skill and strength, and 
such an ally between Egypt, Arabia, and Syria could be 
of inestimable service. He therefore graciously ac- 
cepted his allegiance, confirmed him in his royal rank, 
and obtained from the Senate a decree making his 
kingship secure. Herod was gratified beyond all his 
expectations, and returned in triumphant mood to Jeru- 
salem. Elaborate preparations for the supply of the 
Roman army and for the proper escort of Octavian 
from Ptolemais to the borders of Egypt converted all 


the soldiers into enthusiastic friends of the new ally, 
and helped to win from Octavian the restoration of the 
districts about Jericho, Gadara, Hippos, Samaria, Gaza, 
Anthedon, Joppa, and Straton's Tower. In gratitude 
for these gifts, Herod again escorted Octavian, after his 
conquest of Egypt, as far as Antioch. Perhaps on this 
ride Herod was accompanied by the old body-guard of 
Cleopatra, consisting of four hundred Gauls, also a 
present from Octavian. 

204. Amid the pomp and display of the days of at- 
tendance upon his patron, Herod was full of the joy 
and pride of his marvellous good fortune. At the 
threshold of his palace the chill shadow of suspicion 
fell again upon him, and his days were again darkened 
by wretchedness and crime. Unwilling to learn from 
experience, he had a second time given the command to 
have Mariamne put to death if he did not return from 
his visit to Octavian. Neither she nor her mother 
Alexandra had relished imprisonment in the fortress 
of Alexandrium, and Sohemus proved as faithless as 
formerly Joseph had been in keeping Herod's command 
a secret. Mariamne deeply resented the wicked will 
of her intensely jealous husband, and let him feel the 
keen edge of her resentment. The unhappy king was 
racked with the conflict of love and anger, and was 
completely in doubt as to what to do. All this had 
taken place before the news had come that Antony 
and Cleopatra were both dead, and that Octavian was 
victor in Egypt. The brief time of Herod's absence in 
Egypt and the charm of accompanying Octavian to 
Antioch gave him relief for a while from the deepen- 
ing trouble of his home. That trouble, however, was 
meanwhile being swiftly aggravated by the contempt- 


uous pride of Mariamne, who despised the sister of 
Herod, and by the implacable hatred of this sister, 
Salome, who plotted the death of her enemy. After 
Herod's mind had been sufficiently saturated with sus- 
picion, the time came for action, and his cup-bearer, in 
accordance with careful instructions from Salome, ap- 
peared before Herod with a love-potion which he said 
Mariamne had given him for the king, and whose com- 
position he did not know. In his professed ignorance 
was the very sting of suspicion. Herod was startled, 
and had Mariamne's eunuch examined by torture in 
reference to the matter. The wretched man knew 
nothing of the poisonous mixture, but he did know 
what Mariamne had heard from the faithless Sohemus, 
and that was enough. As before, Herod looked upon 
the knowledge of his secret command as a proof of un- 
faithfulness. Sohemus was at once executed. Mari- 
amne was tried, condemned, and soon after led out to 
execution. The beautiful woman met her death with 
a fortitude worthy of her Maccabean lineage (Ant. xv. 
7, 2-6). 

205. The effect of this sad and awful deed upon 
Herod was terrible. To drown the pangs of remorse, 
he resorted to feasting and then to hunting, and in 
the overstraining of his energies brought on an ill- 
ness at Samaria, which for a time unhinged his reason 
and seriously threatened his life. Alexandra, the cause 
of much of the pitiable king's troubles, was on the alert 
to further her own interests, and tried to get possession 
of the two fortified places in Jerusalem, but was unsuc- 
cessful. When the news of her attempt was reported 
to Herod, it so aroused him as to break the hold of the 
disease, and he ordered Alexandra to be put to death 


without delay (28 B. a). Soon after, Costobar, the 
second husband of Salome, was discovered to be 
guarding and training the sons of Babas, distant rela- 
tives of the Hasmonean house, whom Herod had long 
been looking for, and they were all immediately put to 
death. At last the work was done. " Now none was 
left of the kindred of Hyrcanus, and the kingdom was 
entirely in Herod's own power ; no one was remaining 
of such high position as could interfere with what he 
did against the Jewish laws " (Ant. xv. 7, 9-10). 



206. For many years the Roman world had been 
moving toward that issue which came in the supremacy 
of Augustus, — an absolute despotism. A century of 
civil wars had created necessities which only a single 
ruling authority could meet. Once and again unlimited 
power had been given in emergencies to dictators, con- 
suls, and triumvirates, but only for a special purpose 
and for a limited time. Even Augustus, as Octavian 
was now called, was granted imperial rule for ten years, 
and it was only due to his adroitness that he did not 
give offence by assuming more than a temporary su- 
premacy. Julius Csesar had fallen because he made 
known his wish to take to himself sovereign power, 
and Augustus had studied well the causes of his prede- 
cessor's failure. Nevertheless he had from the first the 
ambition to be the controlling will in the realm, and in 
keeping with his cold, calculating nature he made haste 
slowly. Tacitus tells us his method of procedure: 
" Renouncing the title of triumvir for that of consul, 
Augustus, for the purpose of protecting the people, was 
at first contented with the power of a tribune. Soon 
afterwards, having gained the soldiers by his largesses, 
the people by distributions of food, and all orders of the 
state by the sweets of peace, he grew bolder by degrees 
and drew to himself without opposition the whole power 


of the Senate, the magistrates, and the laws. The brav- 
est of the nobility had perished in battle or by proscrip- 
tion; the rest, won over to servitude by riches and 
honors, preferred the present with its safety to the past 
with its dangers. These changes did not displease the 
provinces; they dreaded the rule of the Senate and 
people on account of the rival ambitions and cupidity 
of the magistrates, who were feebly checked by laws 
which were powerless against violence, corruption, and 
wealth " (Annales i. 2). 

207. When Augustus returned to Rome in the 
autumn of 29 B. c, he began those great changes in 
the organization of the empire which contributed to his 
own strength and to the satisfaction of the provinces. 
Judea at first was not much affected, because of the 
kingship of Herod. Herod's twofold relation, how- 
ever, to Augustus on the one side, and to Palestine on 
the other, determined his course of action in all public 

208. In addition to the proper management of the 
kingdom of Judea, Augustus laid upon Herod two 
large duties requiring energy and care. One resulted 
from the peculiar position of Herod's kingdom ; the 
other from the unifying policy of the emperor. In 
considering the question of the eastern boundaries of 
his dominion, Augustus had no sympathy with the 
former ambitions of Csesar and Antony to carry these 
boundaries beyond the Euphrates. He saw rather in 
the countries bounding the Mediterranean the natural 
limits of such an empire as he wished to realize. 
Egypt, Syria, and Arabia were part of, or adjacent to, 
the line of limitation, and the strength and skill of Herod 
were vital to the maintenance of authority and stability 


along this frontier. Consequently, Herod's territory 
was gradually enlarged until he was ruler over a larger 
kingdom than ever before had been governed from Jeru- 
salem. It was also the pleasure of the great Roman to 
follow out Alexander's method for the unification of 
his empire, as far as its inner life and thought were 
concerned, by bringing all its diverse elements face to 
face with the customs and thinking of that broad 
Hellenism which had gathered into itself the best prod- 
ucts of various lands and times. Herod was a will- 
ing servant of Augustus in this far-reaching project, 
not from any innate love of culture, indeed, but 
rather from the glory it brought him and the fresh 
interests it opened up to him. The working out of 
these wishes of his patron made the history of this 
brilliant period (25-13 b. c.) of his reign an Augustan 
age in Judea upon a small scale. 

209. After the last possible Hasmonean rival had 
been put out of the way, Herod began to introduce inno- 
vations as offensive to his Jewish subjects as they were 
acceptable to his master, Augustus. Games in honor 
of the emperor were instituted to be observed every 
fourth year. " In crowds the Greeks streamed up to 
these festivals in order to carry off the rich prizes 
offered by the king in the various kinds of forbidden 
arts and in the two and four horse chariot races, from 
the Jews, who were unpractised in such abominations." 
Greek plays of blasphemous character were the attrac- 
tions of the theatre in Jerusalem. A veritable tidal 
wave of heathenism swept over the city. It is inter- 
esting to note that some of the Pharisees, true to their 
concern for the letter of the law, focussed their indig- 
nation upon some trophies in the form of suits of armor 



placed about the theatre. " They are the images of 
men," they cried, " and a violation of the law." When 
the pieces were taken down and the wooden posts 
that supported them made bare, they were satisfied, 
even though their conduct was made ridiculous. 
Others were determined that Herod should suffer 
death for his heathenish innovations, and a plot was 
formed to murder him in the theatre. A spy revealed 
the whole plan to Herod, and the rash venture cost 
many lives (Ant. xv. 8, 1-4). 

210. It would have been an unpardonable short- 
coming, in the judgment of Augustus, if Herod had 
not been able to maintain order within his own king- 
dom, and yet if the public pulse was revealed in the 
nefarious plot which had just been exposed and which 
was regarded by the conspirators as a " pious action," 
there was great risk of turbulence and even open 
rebellion. Consequently Herod began the establish- 
ment of those fortresses which should protect himself 
and u hem in the multitude " (Ant. xv. 8, 4). 

211. Already in the time of Antony the temple- 
fortress had been rebuilt and called Antonia ; and 
Herod's palace in the city was not only a marvel of 
costliness and luxury, but also a fortification, so that at 
Jerusalem he was well guarded. To secure himself in 
other parts of the land, Samaria was made a fortress of 
the first rank ; Straton's Tower was strengthened ; 
Gaba in Galilee and Hesbon in the Perea were forti- 
fied. Indeed, to use the words of Josephus, " he was 
surrounding the whole nation with garrisons that they 
might by no means get out of his power, nor fall into 
tumults " (Ant. xv. 8, 5). Furthermore, he covered the 
land with a network of spies, who were to report to 


him all seditious opinions or criticisms upon his gov- 
ernment. He did not hesitate even to degrade himself 
by prowling about the streets of Jerusalem in disguise for 
the same purpose. All large gatherings of the people 
were forbidden; torture was resorted to in order to 
force suspects to tell what they knew. Many were 
hurried away to the prisons of the fortresses and there 
put to death. The people were simply terrorized into 
submission (Ant. xv. 10, 4). 

212. As one contemplates facts like these, it is 
difficult to understand how there could be any bright 
side to what seems an intolerable despotism. And 
yet there was a glory in the Herodian age, as there 
was in that of his patron Augustus, who thoroughly 
understood, if he did not teach to Herod, some of the 
king's despicable ways of knowing the temper of his 
subjects. With all determination to force upon the 
people a quiet mind, if they would have it in no 
other way, Herod earnestly desired to give them the 
real advantages of a well-managed government. The 
better impulses of the man were brought to light in 
the famine and pestilence which in the year 25 B. c. 
brought upon Palestine great suffering and loss of 
life. He threw himself into the work of providing 
relief with the utmost energy, nor did he hesitate, 
when in need of money for supplies, to sell the costly 
furniture of his palace in order to procure corn from 
Egypt. His friendship with Petronius, the governor 
of Egypt, made readily accessible to him the stores of 
the Nile valley, and it is estimated that he distributed 
altogether eight hundred thousand Attic measures of 
corn, while whole villages were provided with cloth- 
ing against the rigors of winter. The splendid man- 


agement of this really great enterprise brought him 
fame abroad, and for a while softened the hearts of his 
subjects (Ant. xv. 9, 1, 2). 

213. As showing, however, how little he really 
cared, after all, for the continued good-will of the peo- 
ple, he suddenly changed the occupant of the high- 
priest's office, solely that he might give greater dignity 
to an Alexandrian family in which was a beautiful 
girl whom he was resolved to marry. Not only did this 
deed contribute to the degradation of the sacred office, 
but this very family — the Boethusim — became, for 
the short time that it held high official station, a 
malignant influence in the nation (Ant. xv. 9, 4). 
To the last he followed his own inclinations in so far 
as they did not bring him into conflict with his Roman 
master. He lived, planned, and worked for Herod's 
sake. His ambitions, when realized, brought large 
material enrichment to his extensive kingdom, but 
they all terminated in the supreme vision of his own 

214. It was as a result of his twofold obligation to 
Augustus (see sect. 208) that much of his passion for 
building found expression. A cordon of fortresses 
for the protection of his frontiers was among his first 
public works. Beginning at Jerusalem, they were 
placed at strategic points with reference both to resist- 
ing outer and suppressing inner foes. Cities were 
built on the Roman model and dignified with foreign 
names. Such were Antipatris, Agrippseum, Sebaste 
(Samaria), and Csesarea. In these cities of his own 
creation he allowed himself entire freedom in the 
recognition of heathen deities and in the deification 
of the emperor. Near the port of Csesarea, on an emi- 


nence which made it visible far out at sea, stood a 
temple with a colossal statue of Augustus, equalling 
that of Jupiter at Olympia, and another of the goddess 
of Rome, like that of Juno at Argos. One god was 
as good as another, and Augustus better than all to 
this godless ruler, who so filled the Gentile portions 
of his kingdom with statues and temples that " it was 
unnecessary to travel far up into the country in order 
to learn that Jehovah had to endure many gods be- 
sides himself in his own land." Nor did he confine 
to Palestine his zeal for promoting the life of Hel- 
lenism. With lavish hand he dealt out the revenues 
from his subjects to adorn foreign cities. For the 
Rhodians he built a Pythian temple ; in Nicopolis, a 
city founded by Augustus near Actium, he put up a 
large part of the public buildings, and Antioch re- 
membered him for the colonnades which he built 
along both sides of her principal thoroughfare (Ant. 
xvi. 5, 3). Tripolis, Damascus, and Ptolemais were 
indebted to him for gymnasia ; Berytus and Tyre for 
market-places ; Byblus for a wall, cloisters, and temple ; 
Sidon and Damascus for theatres; Laodicea for an 
aqueduct, and the whole Hellenistic world for his re- 
habilitation of the Olympic games (J. W. i. 21, 11). 
Well might Augustus say, in view of all this, "that 
the dominions of Herod were too little for the great- 
ness of his soul," and that "he deserved to have the 
kingdom of all Syria and of Egypt also " (Ant. xvi. 
5, 1). All Syria and Egypt together would have 
found the cost of such unmeasured extravagance in- 
tolerable. How much more the comparatively small 
kingdom which had to sustain it! 

215. While making such demands upon the people, 


Herod was alert to increase in every possible way the 
productiveness of the country. He established new 
commercial centres and gave a continual stimulus 
to trade. The greatest achievement of his reign in 
this direction was the building of Caesarea. One of 
the marked features of the Palestinian coast-line is its 
inhospitable character. From Carmel to the Egyptian 
delta it shuts out the sea, offering at only one or two 
points the faintest welcome in the way of a passable 
harbor. The Jews had but one harbor, such as it was, 
on that long sea-line, and that was at Joppa. Great 
had been their exultation when, in the days of the 
Maccabees, they had made themselves masters of it 
(I. Mac. xiv. 5). Its changeful fortunes have already 
been noted, but it is well to bear in mind that among 
all the chief towns of the maritime plain which came 
under the governorship of Herod, it alone was thor- 
oughly Jewish in sympathy and tone. It reflected 
the spirit of Jerusalem, with which it was in close 
connection. For this reason Herod seems to have 
kept away from Joppa, and in seeking a site for the 
construction of a harbor to have preferred to put it in 
closer relation with Sebaste than with Jerusalem, for 
Sebaste was nearer the sea. 


216. Slowly, through twelve years, the work was car- 
ried forward which placed a city of royal quality be- 
side a haven of such noble proportions that in later 
days Caesarea was spoken of as " The Csesarea by the 
August Harbor " (coin of Nero). This harbor was 
wholly artificial, being formed by a mole two hun- 
dred feet wide, which was built of immense stones 
piled upon each other till the mass rose to consider- 
able height above the sea. One half of the exposed 


surface was left in the rough as a breakwater. Upon 
the other, one hundred feet in width, was built a wall 
with several towers and with arches which served as 
lodgings for sailors. A broad quay extended around 
the entire haven and was "a most desirable walk to 
those who desired exercise." The entrance was on 
the north, and when within the port, which was of 
the size of the Piraeus at Athens, ships were securely 
protected from the sea, which every day was stirred 
into tumult by the wide sweep of the wind. Its 
splendid harbor made Caesarea the virtual capital of 
Palestine, and its impulse to commerce was strong 
and undiminished as long as the western world had 
an interest in the land (Ant. xv. 9, 6). 

217. With all this increasing material splendor, the 
Hellenizing developments in the court of Herod kept 
pace. He was himself by education a Greek, and his 
palace was the focal point in Jerusalem of all the 
social and literary interests of a foreign culture. Greek 
scholars and artists were his intimate friends and ad- 
visers. Notable among these was Nicolas of Damascus, 
a man of wide and varied learning, yet withal a skilful 
diplomatist and finished courtier. His history was one 
of the best sources for the records of Josephus (see 
especially books xv.-xvii.), and his fame in science and 
philosophy was wide-spread. Beside him stood Ptole- 
meus, his brother, also of foreign training, chief chan- 
cellor and keeper of the king's seals, and a trusted 
councillor in state affairs. These were the noblest 
specimens of a group of men who kept the tone of the 
court out of harmony with the aims and sympathies of 
the nation, and that lack of harmony was increased by 
the company of sycophants and hangers-on who were 


willing to sacrifice anything for the promotion of their 
own interests, which could best be served in all the 
objectionable schemes of Herod's Hellenistic policy. 
There was little in the influences radiating from 
Herod's palace consonant with the spirit of Judaism. 

218. Despite, however, his wilfulness, Herod wanted 
to be known among the Romans as a popular sovereign. 
In his adroit speech to the people, when he proposed 
to them the building of a new temple, he aimed to 
make it appear that all his building hitherto had been 
for their highest advantage (Ant. xv. 11, 1), and he 
hoped by this supreme architectural achievement to 
offset the irritation of burdensome taxation and foreign 
intrusion. This was not his only motive, but it gave 
strong emphasis to those personal reasons which were 
always prompting him to action. It is possible, as an- 
other has suggested, that he sought to make political 
capital out of Jewish beliefs connected with the temple 
and the Messianic hopes. The words of the prophecy 
of Haggai (ii. 3-9) and the comparatively recent pre- 
dictions of the Book of Enoch (xci. 13), spoke of "that 
house " whose glory should transcend all former temples. 
If he could fulfil these prophesyings, what might it 
not mean for his own name and for the gratification of 
the people ! r 

219. In the fifteenth year of his reign he called a 
great assembly of the people to make to them his as- 
tounding, proposition. His disappointment over its 
reception must have been keen. Distrust and fear 
suggested the dark purpose of depriving them in this 
way of the temple altogether, or, if not that, insuper- 
able difficulties in the execution of his designs. Herod 
skilfully met all objections, and the work began in 


elaborate provisions for the actual construction. A 
thousand wagons were built for carrying stone, ten 
thousand workmen were engaged in preparing mate- 
rial, and one thousand priests were taught to work as 
masons and carpenters, that no polluted hands might 
make the sacred courts unclean. Eight years were 
consumed in the construction of the vast surroundings 
of the temple proper, which itself required the careful 
work of eighteen months. During the whole time 
worship was never interrupted, and Herod himself 
punctiliously respected the ceremonial restriction which 
forbade a foreigner entering the inner courts. He 
chose the anniversary of his accession as the day of 
consecration. With imposing ritual and amid univer- 
sal rejoicings the noble structure was given to the 
worship of Jehovah (Ant. xv. 11, 2, 6). 

220. Josephus has given us in his Antiquities (xv. 
11, 3-5) and in The Jewish War (v. 5, 1-6) a full 
description of the approaches, courts, porticoes, gates, 
and chambers of the sacred area. The whole made a 
picture upon which the eyes of the people were feasted, 
and the excellence of its beauty caused the rabbis to 
say that " whoever had not seen the temple of Herod 
had seen nothing beautiful." It is not strange, there- 
fore, that tradition sought to place upon it the mark of 
divine approval by telling of the conduct of the weather 
during the whole time of construction. The rain fell 
then only at night, and each morning under cloudless 
skies the work went on (Ant. xv. 11, 7). Judaism 
appropriated this temple as a worthy expression of her 
religious devotion, and with new emphasis upon her 
zeal for the outward and the ceremonial filled its 
courts with admiring worshippers. On beyond the 


days of our Lord, workmen were kept busy making 
additions or perfecting parts of the adornment. The 
whole was not completely finished until 64 A. d., just 
when the storm-clouds of war were gathering over 
Judea by whose final outburst the whole temple area 
was strewn with hopeless ruin. 

221. Once more, just after the consecration of the 
temple, the puzzling contradictions in Herod's char- 
acter were illustrated. For years he had carefully re- 
frained from passing a forbidden line iD the sacred 
courts ; now he insisted upon placing a large golden 
eagle, the emblem of heathen Rome, over the great 
gate of the temple. Gratitude was turned into fierce 
indignation, and the eagle doomed to destruction at the 
first favorable opportunity. So amid intense, alter- 
nating emotions in the hearts of his subjects this 
strange man moved on to his end. 



222. The Palestine of 10 b. c. was virtually the 
Palestine of our Lord's ministry. Its material glory, 
its wide-reaching material interests, its foreign ad- 
mixtures, its intensified hopes and fears, — all these 
were what they were because of the tireless ambition of 
the brilliant, barbaric king who then ruled Judea. The 
hopeless task, which Herod undertook, of trying to 
make the Jews an integral part of the Grseco-Roman 
world brought him only bitterness of soul and the 
people immeasurable misery. His splendid buildings 
and large-minded plans for national prosperity, nay, 
more, his rigorous, stern administration, could not 
overcome the indomitable spirit of Judaism. Could 
he have ended his career when the loud hosannas of 
the day of the temple's consecration expressed the joy 
and thanksgiving of the people, the harshness of his 
selfish life might have been softened, but, alas ! he 
lived on to do dark deeds and at last to put the im- 
press of his blood-stained hands upon the opening 
page of the world's gospel. 

223. The purpose of Augustus, in which Herod so 
readily acquiesced, of opening his kingdom to the full 
sway of foreign ideals, was one that must be carried 
on when Herod was no more. Accordingly Herod 
sent his two sons, Alexander and Aristobulus, chil- 


dren by the murdered Mariamne, to Rome to breathe 
in the spirit of the Hellenism which they must foster. 
Every advantage of the imperial capital was open to 
them. They were the pupils of Asinius Pollio, the 
friend of Virgil, and through him came into contact 
with Rome's brilliant social and literary coteries. 
They themselves had grown to be tall, noble-looking 
men, conscious of the royal blood in their veins and 
eager to vindicate the honor of their unfortunate 
mother. Judea awaited with affectionate interest the 
arrival of these descendants of the house they had in 
times past loved to honor. The day of their coming 
to the capital in the year 17 b. c. was, however, a day 
big with fate to Herod and his household. Salome 
soon realized what she must expect from these haughty 
princes, if ever they came to power, and diligently she 
began again her old methods of calumny and false 
witness. Herod's suspicious nature struggled with his 
genuine affection and he tried by suitable marriages 
to stay the mischief that proud contempt on one side 
and revengeful hatred on the other were working out 
between these young princes and Pheroras, Cypros, and 
Salome. To Alexander, the elder brother, was given 
Glaphyra, the daughter of the king of Cappadocia, 
and to Aristobulus, Bernice, the daughter of Salome 
(Ant. xvi. 1, 2). 

224. Hoping for better results from this new ad- 
justment of domestic affairs, Herod hastened to Asia 
to meet Agrippa, the commissioner of Augustus for 
the eastern provinces, and to invite him to come to 
Judea. Next to the coming of Augustus himself was 
prized the visit of this royal minister, and Herod for- 
got his family troubles in his pleasure and pride in 


conducting Agrippa about Csesarea to Sebaste, to the 
strong fortresses, and finally to Jerusalem. The 
Roman official was simply amazed at what he saw. 
It surpassed all his expectations, and each day of his 
stay in Jerusalem found him at the temple, wonder- 
ing at the stately ritual, and at last asking permission 
to offer a sacrifice as an expression of his interest 
and regard (Philo, Leg. Ad Caium). The outcome, in 
fact, from all this attention to Agrippa — for the people 
accompanied him on his way to Csesarea, strewing 
flowers in his path — was to be a blessing to the Jews 
of Asia Minor. Herod determined to accompany 
Agrippa on a campaign to the Bosphorus in the spring, 
but did not reach him until Agrippa arrived at Sinope 
in Pontus. With his usual munificence Herod marked 
his way by sumptuous gifts and also by friendly ap- 
peals to Agrippa for those in peculiar difficulties or 
needs. In Ionia the Jews came to complain of the 
utter disregard paid to their rights and privileges. 
Nicolas of Damascus pleaded their cause, and the 
injustice was stopped. With the blessing of the dis- 
persion in Asia Minor, Herod returned to Jerusalem 
to receive the same expression of good-will from the 
people for this beneficent decision (Ant. xvL 2, 2-5). 

225. Meanwhile the troubles in the palace were 
fast becoming acute. Salome had contrived to shape 
her malignant falsehoods into the form of a plot on 
the part of the young princes to revenge their mother's 
death upon their father, by appealing to Augustus to 
look into the trial of Mariamne. Herod was enraged, 
and in the way of counter plot summoned to Jerusa- 
lem Antipater, his son by Doris, his first wife. In the 
blood of this young man was the poison of all his 


father's worst passions. He was a veritable Iago. 
Mariamne had been instrumental in banishing him 
from Jerusalem and of course he was only too glad 
to join with Salome. He was able to give even to her 
valuable suggestions in the life-and-death game of 
court intrigue and deceit. Ostensibly he was a dear, 
faithful friend ; really he was utterly false to both his 
brothers and his father. It was inconvenient for his 
plans that Herod insisted in commending him to 
Augustus and in finally sending him to Rome (Ant. 
xvi. 3, 1-3), but it was not fatal to them. He was 
compelled to intrigue at long range, but he worked 
with increasing effectiveness until finally Herod re- 
solved to accuse Alexander and Aristobulus before 
Augustus in Rome. In the presence of the emperor, 
Herod spoke out of the misery of his heart, and Alex- 
ander with the straightforwardness of innocence. The 
penetrating insight of Augustus enabled him to appre- 
ciate the true situation. In a scene that moved all to 
tears, the old king was reconciled to his sons, and 
they all with Antipater returned to Judea. At a 
large gathering of the people in the temple, Herod 
declared that his sons were to reign after him, Antip- 
ater first, then Alexander and Aristobulus (Ant. xvi. 
4, 1-4). 

226. In his consummate hypocrisy, Antipater ap- 
peared overjoyed at the reconciliation ; his real reason 
for rejoicing was that he was again within close reach 
of the means whereby to realize his nefarious ambi- 
tions. He began at once to plot against his broth- 
ers and Herod. The deepening troubles of the palace 
were interpreted by some as a judgment upon the 
impious king for searching the tomb of David for 


treasure (Ant. xvi. 7, 2) ; but, despicable as that act 
was in the eyes of the Jews, it lay entirely outside of 
the complex of causes that were slowly shaping the 
destinies of Herod and his sons. Every member of 
the royal family became involved in the inextricable 
tangle of suspicion and treachery. Pheroras, Herod's 
brother, Salome, and Antipater were particularly eager 
to secure the downfall of the sons of Mariamne. Hav- 
ing carefully prepared Herod's mind by suspicion, 
they brought it about that the slaves of the young 
men were tortured. The wretched sufferers confessed 
what they were told to confess, and accused Alexan- 
der of conspiracy. Herod cast him into prison, and in 
the desperateness of his situation Alexander foolishly 
accepted the charge and incriminated all of Herod's 
relations except the clever hypocrite, Antipater. 
Black darkness settled down upon the spirit of the 
king, and another wholesale murder might have fol- 
lowed had not Archelaus, the king of Cappadocia, 
hastened to Judea to save his daughter, the wife of 
Alexander. By assuming an attitude of extreme 
anger toward Alexander and by threatening to take 
his daughter from the wretched court, Herod was 
actually led to plead in tears for his son. Archelaus 
then shifted the blame upon Pheroras, and before he 
set out for home managed to secure a reconciliation 
between even this man and Herod (Ant. xvi. 7-8). 

227. Hardly had this storm blown over when a train 
of events led the hapless king into the disfavor of 
Augustus. A certain Syllaeus, prime minister of the 
Arabian king Obodas II., was ambitious to put himself 
at the head of the kingdom. With the idea of strength- 
ening himself by a helpful alliance, he had, on a visit 


to Jerusalem, made love to Salome, who was old enough 
to be his mother. She, however, was willing to take 
the Arabian, and Herod gave his consent to the mar- 
riage provided Syllaeus would submit to circumcision. 
This he absolutely refused to do, and went away de- 
termined to work mischief for Herod. His opportun- 
ity came in connection with a rebellion in Trachonitis, 
which was put down, indeed, but from the midst of 
which forty of the chief banditti leaders escaped to 
Arabia. Syllseus gave them protection while they 
plundered in Herod's dominions. As their numbers 
and boldness increased, Herod demanded from the Ara- 
bian king the delivery of the robbers. Sy lias us refused 
and carried the matter to Rome. Herod, with the per- 
mission of Saturnius, invaded Arabia, captured the 
robber fortress of Rapita, and in order to keep the 
peace placed three thousand Idumeans in Trachonitis. 
The account of all this, given by Syllseus to Augustus, 
made Herod appear as a reckless disturber of the 
peace. Upon this point Augustus was very sensitive, 
and he at once reprimanded Herod in strong terms, 
telling him that he should henceforth be his subject, 
not his friend. The message brought Herod much 
anxiety and gave fresh stimulus to the disorders on 
the frontier. At length Nicolas of Damascus was 
sent to Rome to put the whole affair in its true charac- 
ter before Augustus. As the latter saw how false and 
malicious Syllseus had been, he wrote to Herod ex- 
pressing repentance for the severe things he had said, 
and condemned Syllseus to death. Obodas II. had 
died, and Augustus would have added the Arabian 
kingdom to Herod's dominions had not a letter at this 
time from Judea suddenly changed his purpose. Be- 


hind that letter lies another dark, painful history 
(Ant. xvi. 9, 1-4). 

228. From the time of the bitter issue of the palace 
intrigues by which Alexander had been thrown into 
prison, complete distrust reigned in the court. Herod 
had confidence in nobody. Safety lay only in divert- 
ing suspicion from one's own person to that of another 
(Ant. xvi. 8, 2). Just at this time a Lacedaemonian, 
named Eurycles, appeared in Jerusalem and determined 
to use the tense conditions in the palace for his own 
gain. The man's cunning was matched only by his 
utter baseness. His method of operation was " to be- 
have to everybody so as to appear to be his particular 
friend, and he made others believe that his associating 
with any one was for that person's advantage " (Ant. 
xvi. 10, 1). In this way he was clever enough to gain 
the confidences of Alexander, Antipater, and Herod, 
and in addition to secure a fine sum of money in the 
way of presents. By forged letters and invented deeds 
he made it indubitably appear that Alexander and Aris- 
tobulus were again seeking their father's death. The 
two were cast into prison. Salome begged Herod to 
kill them, and painful scenes attended the various ex- 
aminations, but the king would not act until he had 
put the case before Augustus. The letter asking per- 
mission to put the young princes to death lost to 
Herod the territory of Arabia. Augustus advised the 
king to consider carefully what he was doing and to 
get the aid of a council of worthy advisers. This was 
called at Berytus and was made up, one half of Ro- 
mans, the other of Jews. Herod himself was the ac- 
cuser of his sons, and his conduct was that of a madman. 
Nevertheless the council gave him his desire, against 



the noble protest of some of the Romans, and in the 
year 7 b. c. the two young men were strangled at 
Samaria. Only one voice was raised in protest against 
the awful crime, that of Teron, an old soldier-friend of 
Alexander's father, but he and three hundred others 
accused of sympathy with the princes were stoned to 
death by Herod's orders (Ant. xvi. 11, 1-7). With 
fche death of these two rash but noble-minded young 
men, the race of worthy, admirable Hasmoneans came 
to an end. In no succeeding representative of the line 
tvas there the power to kindle popular enthusiasm. 

229. Once more the way seemed clear to quiet and 
security. Little did the old king realize, however, that 
swift Nemesis would soon hold up to scorn and horror 
the clever, all-powerful Antipater. Already the hatred 
of the nation was strong against him, for, despite his 
dissimulations, he was looked upon as the real mur- 
derer of his brothers. This, however, gave him slight 
uneasiness. His eyes were fixed upon the throne, and 
the sight of Herod yet occupying it incited his fiend- 
ish cunning to its utmost. He began his preparations 
for the final step to actual kingship by conciliating his 
father's friends by rich presents, and his masterful de- 
ception might have succeeded more quickly had not 
the lynx-eyed Salome seen through it and kept her 
brother informed. He in turn dared not act upon the 
information which Salome gave him because he knew 
too well her power to bear false, slandering witness 
(Ant. xvii. 1, 1). 

230. Among the real facts she had to tell Herod 
was the promise the Pharisees had made to Pheroras 
that the Judean crown should be taken from Herod 
and given to him, and that a eunuch named Bagoas 


should raise up a son to the childless Pheroras in ac- 
cordance with the word of Isaiah (lvi. 3). "Let not 
the eunuch say I am a dry tree." All of this had 
Messianic bearing; indeed, the rumors of a coming 
Messiah were now undoubtedly repeated to Herod. 
Prophecies of this kind he both feared and hated, and 
the Pharisees who were trying thus to give them cir- 
culation were promptly put to death. Herod asked 
Pheroras to put his wife away, for she was intimately 
concerned in this affair, but he would not, and retired 
with her to his tetrarchy in Perea. Antipater was 
forbidden to have anything to do with them. This 
command he respected only by trying to avoid dis- 
covery. The fear of the growing suspicion of his 
father led him to ask to be sent to Rome. Herod 
gladly gave him permission to go, and sent with him to 
Augustus the will in which he was named as the suc- 
cessor to the throne. In Rome he continued his plot- 
tings, but events meanwhile were taking place at home 
by which the eyes of Herod were opened to the black 
villany of his long course of treachery. The death of 
Pheroras awakened suspicion, and upon investigation 
it was found to be the result of poison given by his 
wife. She confessed also to having received poison 
from Antipater to kill Herod. While the investiga- 
tion was in progress, Bathyllus, Antipater's freedman, 
arrived from Rome. He had in his keeping not only 
letters concocted to defame Archelaus and Philip, his 
brothers, but also another dose of poison for Herod 
(Ant. xvii. 2, 4; 3, 1-2; 4, 1-3). 

231. Masking his rage, the king sent Antipater a 
friendly letter asking him to come home. Antipater 
had not heard a word about the revelations that fol- 


lowed the death of Pheroras. Not a man had been 
willing to warn him, and he had no suspicion of danger 
until he reached Csesarea and found no one to greet 
him. It was impossible now to turn back, and he rode 
on in sullen silence to Jerusalem. His reception at 
the palace foretold unmistakably his fate. He tried 
to salute Herod, who replied : " God confound you, 
you vile wretch ! Do not touch me till you have 
cleared yourself of these crimes that are charged upon 
you ! " (J. W. i. 31, 5). In the trial that followed, 
Herod's review of the man's base return for his affec- 
tion was indeed pathetic. The young man himself 
made a wonderful appeal for his life. The proof of 
his guilt, however, was overwhelming, and he was cast 
into prison to await the word of Augustus. This came 
soon after, and five days before Herod himself died the 
miserable man was put to death and " ignobly buried 
in the Hyrcanium " (Ant. xvii. 5, 1-8 ; 7, 1). 

232. Herod was now an old man of seventy. His 
long life had been full of resolute activity, and for 
years he had had little relief from the terrible tension 
of suspicion and fear. His iron constitution broke at 
last. Nothing since the death of Mariamne had so 
struck at the very centre of life within him as the 
exposure of Antipater. Its own revelation of treach- 
ery, and the torturing questions which it put in refer- 
ence to the death of the sons of Mariamne, were too 
much for the weakened, suffering old man. He sank 
under a complication of disorders, physical and mental. 
His sickness itself inspired horror. The news of it 
sent a thrill of joy through the city, and measures were 
at once taken to remove the hated objects of his heathen 
profanations. The golden eagle was the first to come 


down, and then such images as were found elsewhere 
in the city. The haste, however, was ill-timed. As a 
fire that seems to have died out leaps unexpectedly 
into a destructive flame, so the fury of Herod burst 
forth once more at the tidings of the zeal of the rabbis 
and their scholars, and they paid for their rashness with 
their lives (Ant. xvii. 6, 1-4). 

233. Death was now looking him in the face. He 
had tried in vain the baths of Callirrhoe. His physi- 
cians could do no more for him. The utter desolation 
of his soul maddened him. He sent for Salome and 
bade her summon all the principal men of the nation, 
shut them up in the hippodrome, and at the announce- 
ment of his death massacre them, so that there should 
be mourning at his funeral. The great company was 
imprisoned within' the hippodrome, but was not massa- 
cred. Salome released them, and Herod was un- 
mourned. The splendid funeral, with its bier of gold, 
its odor of burning spices and sweet incense, its mili- 
tary display, and all its regal pomp had in it not one 
touch of sorrow. 

234. " In the days of Herod the King," in a quiet 
Judean village, a babe was born whose coming gave to 
Herod's reign its deepest interest for all time. Word 
was first brought to him of the singular character of 
this unknown child by the inquiries of wise men 
from the East. That question, " Where is he that is 
born King of the Jews ? " started afresh the anxious 
fears which every Messianic prophecy or hope caused 
Herod. An enrollment, required by Augustus and 
carried out in accordance with Jewish custom, had 
taken Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem. When Herod 
learned that prophecy pointed to this very town as the 


birthplace of the Messiah (Matt. ii. 4-6), his fears 
gave speed to the execution of his plan to insure the 
death of the unwelcome child by a general slaughter 
of the children of Bethlehem. How the deed failed of 
its purpose ; how the kingdom of the child-king slowly 
widened beyond the dominions of Herod and of 
Augustus, — is a matter of record not simply in the 
history of the Jews, but in the history of the world. 
Like many another embodiment of the hatred and 
determination of evil, Herod by " the slaughter of the 
innocents " sought to stay the saving purpose of God. 
His pitiable impotence was and ever will be a striking 
illustration of the utter futility of any earthly power 
which seeks to do what he did that dark day in 




235. The complex interests and external brilliancy 
of Herod's long reign engage naturally the complete 
attention of the historian. Augustus and the Roman 
officials, Herod and his court, the high-priest and the 
Jewish nobles, the Greeks and their Hellenistic cities, 
are all factors in a problem whose outworking in the 
days of the Idumean king was of absorbing interest. 
An interest yet deeper, however, centres in the life of 
the people, for that life, inspired by stern ambitions 
and quickened by large hopes, was also working out 
issues of earnest import. Except when in moments of 
indignation a righteous spirit flamed forth against the 
heathenish deeds of Herod, the nation's life moved 
quietly and with the monotony of every-day routine. 
It was a still, strong current revealing its depth and 
power only against the obstacles that were at times 
thrown defiantly in its way. These times of opposition 
are, therefore, of more than passing interest. They 
are indices, exponents, of that inward development 
which is, after all, the essential part of a nation's his- 
tory. As the critical moments of antagonism measure 
the force of a nation's inner life, so the institutions 
which are dear to it reveal the quality of that life and 
the literature which comes out of it, its trend or direc- 
tion. Power, quality, direction, — these are the char- 


acteristics the knowledge of which enables one to 
speak of the inner life of a nation. 

236. Already many illustrations of the first charac- 
teristic have been before us. The cheering crowd that 
nerved the daring despoilers of the golden eagle on 
the temple ; the silent multitude which received in 
distrust and fear Herod's proposals to build a new 
temple ; the abiding hatred which all his achievements 
could not overcome, — these speak of the intensity of 
that life which was unalterably opposed to the foreign 
influences embodied and promoted by Herod. The 
whole Maccabean period itself was a revelation of it. 

237. The institutions in which such life was nour- 
ished and developed were the home, the sjmagogue, 
the school, and the temple. All had one common 
central object of interest and devotion, — the law. 
All sought to transmute into the fibre and sinew of 
character the precepts derived from its pages. By 
them all the way of its requirements was considered 
the way of life. Hence began in the earliest and most 
impressible years of childhood that instruction which 
was to instil into the little mind love and reverence 
for the religion of his people. Their histor} T , full of 
the care and guidance of God, of the brave and noble 
deeds of heroes and prophets, and of events of deep 
religious significance, was opened to him. He was 
taught to repeat verses from the law, benedictions, and 
wise sayings, and at a very early age began to learn to 
read. " We devote," says Josephus, " the greatest 
pains to the education of children, and make the ob- 
servance of the law and the rules of piety which have 
been given us the most important of our lives n 
(Against Apion i. 12). Judaism thus laid its founda- 


tions securely in the mind of childhood. Her children 
were to grow up in the " nurture and admonition " of 
the law. Her spirit was to move the tender, sensitive, 
responsive spirits of the little ones. By birth they 
were partakers of the covenant ; by training they must 
learn the way to the largest realization of that cove- 
nant's blessings. The home life was in an atmosphere 
of piety. With the first awakening consciousness of 
the child began those impressions of the religious in- 
terests of father and mother which prepared the way 
for the teaching of the law and all along enforced its 

238. There is no good reason for rejecting the tra- 
dition regarding Simon ben Shetach's endeavor to 
establish schools for young children (see sect. 132), 
although it is probable that elementary schools did 
not exist in any large number until considerably later 
than the time of Christ. The establishment of them 
in every province and town is attributed to Jesus, the 
son of Gamaliel (63-65 A. d.). When such a school 
existed, it was in connection with the synagogue. 
For the great mass of Jewish boys there was no further 
direct, personal instruction than that which was given 
at home, or in one of the elementary schools, if such 
existed before Christ's time. All higher education 
in the way of schools was only for those who were 
destined to be students of the law. This does not 
mean, however, in the case of those who worked in 
the fields, or at their trades, that the impressions of 
childhood were left to grow dim and finally fade away. 
On the contrary, the developing lad was, as the years 
went on, brought more and more into inevitable obliga- 
tion to the observances of the law, and at the first 


appearance of the signs of manhood he entered upon 
his full service. 

239. Meanwhile instruction came to him through 
the instrumentality of that distinctive institution of 
post-exilic Judaism, — the synagogue. This was the 
true school of the nation. The primary purpose of 
the synagogue was not devotion, but instruction. 
Whether the origin of the institution be traceable to 
the exile, or to the time of Ezra, it became the most 
telling factor in the development of that Judaism 
which was ready to suffer, and to war, if need be, for 
the law. It gathered the people of the whole land 
together into its assemblies on the Sabbath and on 
feast days in order to expound to them the scriptures. 
By that exposition it made its frequenters familiar 
with the lofty moral elements in the law and with the 
exalted spiritual ideals of the prophets. It is true that 
the expositions of the scribes, who found a fine scope 
for their ability in the synagogue, were often marred 
by the refinements of casuistry, or by the perversions 
of allegorical explanation, but there were also the inter- 
pretation of real insight and the inspiration of noble 

240. The synagogue was the social religious centre 
of the town. In communities preponderatingly Jew- 
ish, the local council of elders possessed both civil 
and ecclesiastical authority ; they exercised control in 
the affairs of the synagogue. One of their number 
was generally the ruler of the synagogue, and it was 
his duty to appoint readers and preachers for the ser- 
vices. The " minister " was the official who kept the 
building and the paraphernalia in order, and attended 
to the scripture rolls for reading; he also had charge 


of the execution of the sentence of scourging when- 
ever pronounced by the synagogue. The order of ser- 
vice in the time of Christ and for some time before 
his coming was comparatively simple. It began with 
the recitation by a leader of a sort of confession of 
faith (Deut. vi. 4-9; xi. 13-21; Numbers xv. 37- 
41). The congregation meanwhile stood with their 
faces toward the Holy of Holies at Jerusalem and 
responded at intervals with an " amen." Then came 
the lesson from the law, the reading of which was 
distributed among seven men, each taking at least 
three verses and waiting after each verse for its trans- 
lation from Hebrew into Aramaic, the language of the 
people, by a special interpreter. A brief prayer of 
thanksgiving preceded and followed each section of 
the reading. After the law, thus read, followed a 
lesson from the prophets, which was freely interpreted 
or even paraphrased and made the basis for the dis- 
course of the day. The exercises closed with a bene- 
diction which took the form of a prayer if no priest 
was present to pronounce it as a benediction. 

241. This plain service, with its emphasis upon in- 
struction, afforded the people constant contact with the 
results, methods, aims, and spirit of one of the most 
potent forces in the life of the nation. It was possible 
for any suitable person who felt that he had a message 
to step forward and address the audience, as Jesus did 
in the synagogue at Nazareth, but usually and natu- 
rally this duty devolved upon those who were fitted for 
it, and they were the scribes. The synagogue was to 
them an open door of opportunity through which to 
reach the nation and to bring to it the fruits of years 
of devotion to the study of the law. " Lovely was it," 


reads the Targum on Judges v. 9, describing in reality 
the rabbis of Herodian times, " as they sat in the syna- 
gogues and taught the people the words of the law, 
when they pronounced the blessing and professed the 
truth before God. Their own business did they make 
of no less account, and rode upon asses through the 
whole land, and sat upon the seat of judgment." 

242. The name " scribe " applied originally to those 
who made copies of the law, but it soon acquired a 
wider significance, since care for the text involved a 
study of it and often comment upon it. Whatever the 
position and influence of the scribes before and during 
the exile, the policy of Ezra (Ezra vii. 10), who himself 
was more a scribe than a priest, gave a new impulse to 
the service to which they had been accustomed. The 
men who sought to realize his ideal of seeking the law 
of the Lord, of doing it, and of " teaching in Israel 
statutes and judgments,' ' found their time fully occu- 
pied. They could not make this earnest work second- 
ary. " The wisdom of the scribe cometh by opportunity 
of leisure," says the Son of Sirach (xxxviii. 24), and 
that opportunity was gained in making their labor an 
independent profession. By the beginning of the Greek 
period they had formed themselves into a guild of bib- 
lical scholars, andrby their diligence and zeal gradually 
took from the priests the guardianship of the law. Nor 
was it only in mere theoretical interests that their work 
was carried on. Life in all its reach and complexity 
must ultimately be covered by the commands and re- 
quirements of the law, and the solemnity of the rela- 
tionship of life and law lay in a strong faith in divine 
retribution. Duty was thus pressed home upon the 
conscience. The highest welfare of the individual, as 


well as of the nation, was in obedience, — an obedience, 
however, whose interpretation was not satisfied in a 
free response to a great principle of action, but in that 
demand for attention to the details of duty which 
finally, by a multiplicity of rules, shut the principle 
away from sight. Hence the threefold task of the 
scribes, — to expand the law, to teach it, and to 
administer it. 

243. It was the complexity of life that compelled 
the expansion of the law. No written law can meet all 
the exigencies of experience nor even the details of 
commonplace routine ; but question after question 
sprang up from just these sources, and in the effort to 
answer the questions accumulated slowly the mass of 
oral traditions which came ultimately to have the value 
of the law itself. It was in the higher schools, notably 
in those found in Jerusalem, that the discussions were 
carried on which resulted in the establishment of such 
interpretative additions to the law itself as met the 
needs of experience and at the same time put a " hedge 
about the law ; " that is, kept its force inviolate. It was 
to the schools that boys of promise were sent to be 
fitted for the honorable position of the rabbi. It was 
from these schools that the teachers in the synagogue 
came to give to the people the benefit of their learning 
and to quicken fidelity. The two readings in the ser- 
vice of a Sabbath morning gave opportunity for the 
expression of the twofold wisdom of the scribes. 
Their comment upon the Pentateuchal law was in the 
form of legal precept and was called by them " Halacha," 
or binding rule ; their discourses upon the prophets, in 
which imagination had fair play, often in the form of 
parable or legend, were described as " Haggada," or 


edifying comment. One form of teaching was explicit, 
regulative, and authoritative ; the other was imagina- 
tive, mystical, often transcendental. One denned duty ; 
the other often merely satisfied curiosity. One aimed 
to bring this life completely under the domain of law ; 
the other, upon the wings of speculation, entered the 
realm of angels, or of evil spirits, or into that happy 
future time when the Messiah should come. 

244. A good specimen of the manner in which hag- 
gadistic tradition sought thus to satisfy a useless curi- 
osity is found in the Book of Jubilees, — a work full of 
stories and fables regarding the patriarchs and intent 
upon showing that the law existed from eternity, and 
was observed by the angels in all its directions concern- 
ing festivals and ceremonies. Entertaining as all this 
was, it was nevertheless in the Halacha that the spirit 
of Judaism attained its completest expression. Under 
the pleasing delusion of honoring God's will was de- 
veloped a system of exactions and restrictions which 
gratified intellectual pride and at the same time offered 
a detailed program for a holy life. Two themes es- 
pecially were the subject of repeated discussion and 
definition, and they are good examples of the aim and 
method of this whole line of tradition. These were the 
sanctity of the Sabbath and the requirements concern- 
ing both cleanness and uncleanness. In the Mishna, 
which is the collection of the oral traditions made at 
the end of the second century a. d., there are thirty- 
nine kinds of work expressly prohibited on the Sabbath, 
each of which, by casuistical application, was made to 
include other works fancifully allied to that in the 
main prohibition. The day was made a burdensome, 
wearying complex of duties, both positive and negative 


In the same spirit was developed the tiresome explicit- 
ness regarding ceremonial purity and purification. No 
less than twelve treatises in the Mishna are devoted 
to the subject. There was, indeed, practically no end 
to the possible ramifications of scribal casuistry. It was 
an astonishing thing when Jesus, in reverent originality 
and calm, passionless independence, put away tradition, 
and with an " I say unto you," went back to what has 
been called " the mother speech of all religion." 

245. Scribism was in full power when his fresh, 
heaven-sent message was heard in Galilee and Judea. 
The traditions were at that time only orally trans- 
mitted. The marks, therefore, of successful pupils in 
the schools were a good memory and scrupulous care 
to add nothing to what was taught them. The highest 
compliment a scholar could receive was to be com- 
pared to a cemented well which loses not a drop of 
water (Sayings of the Fathers, ii. 8). Repetition was 
the soul of knowledge. " It hath been said " was the 
watchword of attention. Religious life was loaded 
down with the oppressive weight of these punctiliously 
repeated additions. Even the Mishna was itself fur- 
nished with a commentary called the Gemara, until at 
last in comment upon comment the basal precept was 
often beyond recognition. 

246. As life was thus in every detail of it lifted 
into the sphere of a religious legalism, the adminis- 
trative function of the scribe became an inevitable 
consequence. Who could so well determine what 
was right, that is, what was legal, as he ? He was by 
his very position a jurist. It is, therefore, but natu- 
ral that scribes should have place and power in the 
Sanhedrin. In this highest court of the nation they 


figured with imposing efficiency. In their several 
capacities of teachers, preachers, and judges, they thus 
became the guides of the nation. They were the 
strength of the Pharisees, to which party nearly all 
of them belonged, and with all the urgency of a zeal 
to save the nation by a carefully prescribed righteous- 
ness, they seconded all endeavors to make religious 
rather than political ideals the goal of the nation's 

247. Our New Testament is witness to the honor 
which they received among the people (Matt, xxiii. 
6, 7), and the Mishna defines clearly their right to 
receive it. According to its teachings, the rabbis 
were the lamp and shield bearers of Israel, the princes 
of the people and the fathers of the world ; a rabbi was 
worthy of the same reverence as God himself (Weber, 
Judische Theologie, p. 125). The consequences of 
such claims as these are all too clearly seen in the 
pride and arrogance which sought out the foremost 
places in the synagogues and received with self- 
flattering satisfaction the reverential greetings of men 
in the market-place (Matt, xxiii. 6-7). All of the 
scribes, however, were not of this character. Among 
them were men of the noblest type ; men who with all 
their learning and influence lived humble, God-fearing 
lives. Such was Hillel, a contemporary of Herod, 
about whose name many mythical stories have gathered, 
and who said, " What you would not have done to 
you do not to others." Such were Gamaliel and Simon, 
his son. Their exceptional character is the more strik- 
ing in the fact that they lived in the days when the 
legitimate results of the methods and aims of scribism 
were sadly evident in both the schools and the nation. 


248. It has with truth been said that " the early 
scribes were not the enslavers of the people, but 
instead consecrated, zealous, efficient teachers who by 
their faithful instruction pointed out to the masses the 
way of righteousness and gave to the forms of worship 
a meaning which they had never before possessed" 
(Kent, vol. iii. sect. 238). Time and method changed 
all this. Instead of deepening and enriching religious 
life, all this zeal for the law brought about a pitiable 
externalization of it. Free moral action in the light 
of great principles was exchanged for an outward, 
rule-defined constraint which became more and more 
burdensome. Trivial duties were placed upon the 
same level with those of an exalted character. The 
result was an entire lack of moral perspective. The 
quality of an act was simply in its conformity or non- 
conformity to a given requirement. " Moral duty 
was split up into an endless atomistic multitude of 
separate duties and obligations." The process insured 
the slow, sure death of all joyous moral freedom. 
Nowhere in the Gospels are sterner words to be found 
than in those with which Jesus addressed these mislead- 
ing teachers. " Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, 
hypocrites ! " is the terrible refrain of the twenty-third 
chapter of Matthew, and that chapter is a startling 
summary of what these learned doctors had done and 
were doing for Judaism in Palestine during the days 
of the Maccabean and the Roman supremacy. 

249. It has been said that the synagogue was the 
rival of the temple. If so, the rivalry was entirely 
unconscious. It was expressed in the strength of 
the hold of the synagogue upon the Jews both in 
Palestine and in the dispersion rather than in any 



voice exalting one institution at the expense of the 
other. No voice, indeed, could be loyal to the law 
and at the same time depreciate in the slightest the 
great central shrine of the nation's faith. Hence it 
happened that while the scribes were often quite out 
of sympathy with the higher caste of i:he priesthood, 
they elaborated with their customary care the pre- 
cepts regarding the sanctuary. Nor was it simply in 
the multiplied requirements of the scribal traditions 
that the temple's honor and service were faithfully 
guarded. Its daily offerings were a relief to burdened 
hearts wherever the expanded law by its pressure upon 
conscience had quickened the sense of sin. And even 
where the sacrificial offering was the climacteric ex- 
pression of punctilious formal observances, the visible 
means of approach to God, of the atonement for sin, 
and of the renewal of a holy covenant were looked upon 
as a necessity. This is shown in the fact that private 
offerings and sacrifices far outnumbered those that 
were public. All day long the priests were busy with 
these offerings, — witnesses of the effort to secure the 
favor of God. There is no contradiction between this 
fidelity and the externalization of religious life. The 
fidelity was on the line of the formalism, and imposing 
as the ritual of the temple was, it was, even before the 
days of the Saviour, an elaborate complex of services 
which expressed in highest forms the satisfaction of 
legal requirement. That there was in it no reality at 
all would be a statement wide of the truth. There 
were faithful priests and earnest worshippers, but 
beside the altar and within the sacred courts were 
influences at work which were undermining the vital 
import of the sacrifices. The higher ranks of the 


priesthood and the scribes were both in different 
ways and with different aims helping on this same 

250. Despite the formal equality of the whole body 
of priests there were formed about given families 
from whom high officials had been taken, or who by 
especial circumstances had secured marked favors, 
certain coteries which claimed superiority and which 
were responsive to all the worldly influences about 
them. The emoluments of their office brought them 
wealth and luxury, and gave them little interest in 
the spiritual demands of their exalted position. These 
priests were Sadducean in their political attitude and 
had awakened the distrust of the nation. Indeed, 
from the time that the office of high-priest had been 
at the disposal of the civil ruler, the glory of the 
priesthood had been shadowed. Add to this the fact 
that the great body of the ordinary priests aspired to 
no knowledge beyond the routine of the temple ser- 
vice, and it is not difficult to understand how the 
doctors of the law gradually supplanted them in in- 
fluence and authority. Here there were two forces 
which were, each in its own way, devitalizing the wor- 
ship of the Holy place; one by a mere professional 
attention to sacred duties, the other by an externaliza- 
tion of duty itself. And yet the temple was thronged 
at the great festivals, and each day from the moment 
when the rays of the rising sun first fell upon Hebron, 
and the cry was made, "it is day at Hebron," the 
courts of the Holy place were alive with the varied 
interests of religious praise and devotion. Nor did 
that devotion cease till the altar and the Holy of 
Holies were cast down in hopeless ruin by the Ko- 


mans. The priests themselves grew more arrogant 
and worldly-minded (Ant. xx. 9, 2) ; the scribes kept 
adding to the traditions, and yet the life of the nation 
tightened its hold npon the law. 

251. Why it all was so must be answered in our 
consideration of the determining motives of Judaism, 
and for that we must turn to the literature which 
expressed the hopes and the dreams of the nation. 
These centre about that all-important figure of later 
Judaism, — the Messiah. He was to come because 
the people had been faithful. And then, too, he was 
to come to make the nation glorious, — a faithful 
nation made supreme and immortal by a triumphing 
Messiah; under the glory of that hope the scribes 
might divide the law till its minute exactions left 
nothing out, and the people would attend if only their 
hope might have fruition. " If Israel could keep only 
two Sabbaths as they should be kept, redemption 
would come at once," was the word of one of the 
rabbis, and it expresses what is said once and again 
in the Mishna, that Israel's redemption was dependent 
upon her repentance and fulfilment of the law. Amid 
the dark days of foreign interference and oppression, 
the hope brightened and enlarged till its scope was 
commensurate with the world. 

252. The earliest unquestioned reference to the Mes- 
siah in Apocalyptic literature is found in the second 
part of the Book of Enoch (lxxxiii.-xc), written be- 
tween 166-161 b. c, and it gives us simply the asso- 
ciation of his name with the great changes which God 
himself was to bring about. The Messiah was to ap- 
pear after the adversaries of the righteous had been de- 
stroyed, and God had set up the New Jerusalem. In 


the fourth part of the same work (xxxvii.-lxx.), which 
dates from the first half of the first century B. C, the 
Messiah is represented as a supernatural being, and in 
conceptions corresponding with that concerning his 
origin are set forth his universal dominion and the 


blessedness of those who shall dwell with him in 
righteousness and peace. With the same exalted tone 
the Psalms of Solomon (Psalms xvii.-xviii.) tell of a 
righteous king, pure from sin, who shall gather to- 
gether the dispersed of Israel, banish the unbelieving 
Gentile from the nation, destroy the ungodly and 
establish such a glorious reign that from the ends 
of the earth men shall come to see it. 

253. On down through the first century the Mes- 
sianic hope held before the hearts of the faithful the 
vision of rest and joy. Jesus came and preached and 
died. The nation saw no hope in him. The Book of 
Jubilees can tell of only the old, weary way to the 
longed-for glory. A time of bitterness and sorrow 
shall quicken the hearts of all to do "all his com- 
mandments and his ordinances and all his laws, with- 
out departing either to the right hand or to the left." 
Then slowly, surely the days of rejoicing will come, 
all enemies shall be destroyed and the days shall all 
be days of blessing. In the same way the Assumption 
of Moses (7-29 a. d.) conditions the coming of the 
Messianic kingdom upon the nation's repentance, and 
promises, for the happy time which that repentance 
shall usher in, the destruction of Israel's enemies and 
her exaltation even to heaven. 

254. Nor was the voice of cheer and hope heard 
only in Palestine where the hated Roman and his 
despised vassals — the Herods — made more intense 


the desire for deliverance. Judaism in Alexandria 
was dreaming and prophesying about the same happy 
time. In a form consonant with its general character 
the Book of Wisdom expects a Messianic kingdom 
(iii. 7, 8), and that kingdom is the ultimate blessing 
in the Sibyl's prophetic vision of the future (iii. 652- 
794). Even Philo, whose deepest interest was in the 
philosophic interpretation of his faith, looked forward 
to a consummation in the nation's history when the 
despised should gather from all parts of the earth to 
the Holy Land and there enjoy immeasurable blessings, 
material as well as spiritual (De Execrat. sect. 8, 9; 
De Prem. et Poem. sect. 15-20). 

255. About this hope also clustered a group of 
teachings which intensified its charm. Jerusalem 
should be renovated and become the centre of the 
world-wide kingdom of the Messiah. Death should 
give up every righteous soul that had entered its 
shadowy dominions. In the reconstructed nation right- 
eousness and peace should make possible all earthly 

256. At the same time that Jesus walked with 
ruthless feet through the tangled meshes of scribal 
sophistry and taught the way of the true fulfilment 
of the law, he watched with earnest care lest that 
magic word " Messiah " should fall in public from his 
lips. The quivering expectation of the hour he dared 
not answer in a word, and his own heart must have 
been sad indeed, when in that moment of entry into 
Jerusalem amid the loud hosannas, he realized that he 
could not, must not, satisfy the nation's dreams. Thus, 
then, Judaism lived out its inner life. Upon its stern 
severity fell the genial light of Hellenism, attracting 


some toward the sunnier life. Others held the happy 
medium which took the best from the nation's gift 
and from the great world outside. Others still in 
whose hearts the Spirit worked his will, kept the 
" inner law divine," but the great mass of the people, 
the nation as a whole, toiled under the burden of the 
law and cheered their weary way by hopes of blessed 
days to come, which hope grew intenser with the 


herod's sons and king agrippa 

257. Immediately after the public announcement 
of Herod's death his last will was read to a large 
gathering of soldiers and people in the amphitheatre 
at Jericho. By its provisions, which could not go into 
effect until approved by Augustus, Archelaus, a son 
by Malthace, was to receive the royal title with Judea, 
Samaria, and Idumea ; Herod Antipas, brother of Ar- 
chelaus, as tetrarch, was to govern Galilee and Perea, 
while Philip, a son by Cleopatra of Jerusalem, was to 
rule, also as tetrarch, over the northeastern districts of 
Batanea, Trachonitis, Auranitis, Gaulanitis, Paneas, and 
Iturea. Salome, the sister of Herod, was remembered 
by the gift of Jamnia and Ashdod on the coast and 
Phasaelis in the Jordan valley. It was quite contrary 
to Herod's original intention to break up in this way 
the large kingdom which his genius had established 
(see J. W. i. 30, 7), and his final will has been justly 
estimated as a compromise between the various in- 
trigues of the palace (Hausrath). Whether tins esti- 
mate be true or not, the will committed the different 
sections of the kingdom to different policies and is- 
sues, determined in each case by the character of the 
man in supreme command. 

258. Judea soon discovered that she had little to 
expect from a change of masters. She was still in the 


grasp of a Herod whose methods and ambitions were 
in line with those of his father. Friction began at 
once. From a golden throne ostentatiously set up in 
the temple-enclosure Archelaus made to the people 
fine promises and pretensions regarding his govern- 
ment. These were immediately brought to test by 
demands made for a reduction of taxes and customs, 
for the release of prisoners, for the punishment of 
those who had counselled the death of the despoilers 
of the Roman eagle, for the deposition of the high- 
priest Josar, and for the expulsion of the Gentiles. 
The young ruler was in a close place. He did not wish 
to provoke an outbreak before his confirmation in au- 
thority by Augustus ; neither had he a mind to follow 
out any such rigorous line of action as these demands 
required. The people would not listen to delay and 
the situation became acute. It was the time for the 
Passover and the gathering crowds in Jerusalem made 
the position of Archelaus hourly more dangerous. He 
learned the mood of the people from the rough treat- 
ment which a detachment of soldiers, sent to keep 
order, received at their hands, and forthwith his whole 
fighting force was called out to quell the growing 
tumult. Three thousand of the Jews fell in the fierce 
fight which took place in the streets and temple, and 
orders were given that all visitors to the feast should 
return home (Ant. xvii. 9, 1-3). 

259. Leaving behind him intense and bitter feeling, 
Archelaus set off for Rome. At Caesarea he met 
Sabinus, the emperor's administrator in Syrian affairs, 
who was on his way to Judea to take charge of Herod's 
matters until a successor should be appointed. This 
man proved only an exasperation to the already excited 


people. Before his arrival in Jerusalem, the contagion 
of rebellion had spread over the whole land, and Varus, 
the governor of Syria, had brought down his legions 
from Antioch to overawe the people. One of these 
legions was left at Jerusalem to support Sabinus, who, 
in reckless greed, used it to oppress the people and to 
enrich himself. As a consequence the feast of Pente- 
cost was made a time of war rather than of thanksgiv- 
ing, and a desperate effort was made to utterly destroy 
the Romans. Against the most stubborn resistance 
the latter fought their way to the temple-courts and 
robbed the treasury, Sabinus himself carrying off four 
hundred talents (Ant. xvii. 10, 1-2). 

260. Once more the spirit of revolt flew swiftly 
over the land. In Galilee, Judas put himself at the 
head of a large force, seized the arsenal at Sepphoris 
and made himself a terror in the northern province. 
Simon, a former slave of Herod, proclaimed himself 
king, and besides other works of destruction, looted 
the royal palace at Jericho. Athronges, a certain shep- 
herd and leader of a band of robbers, took advantage 
of the restless, rebellious spirit in the country, to place 
upon his head a royal crown, and to inspire terror in 
Judea. Only one common purpose animated these 
and all other uprisings of the time, and that was to 
drive out the hated Romans. Varus, as soon as he 
heard of the general condition in the land, hastened 
southward collecting auxiliary troops on the way, and, 
by the sharpest measures, among which was the cruci- 
fixion of two thousand of the rebels, put down the 
rebellion (Ant. xvii. 10, 4-10). 

261. Meanwhile, in Rome, Archelaus, Antipas, 
Philip, and a deputation from the Jews were urging 


their wishes upon Augustus. Not realizing what their 
petition might mean to them, the Jewish ambassadors 
urged the emperor to place the country under the 
direct control of a Roman governor. In a notable 
assembly in the temple of Apollo a conference was 
held and each claimant allowed to present his case. 
The Jews spoke earnestly and well, but their grave 
charges were met by the skilful rebuttal of Nicolas 
of Damascus, who spoke for his master Archelaus. 
Augustus finally adhered to the provisions of Herod's 
last will with the exception of making Archelaus 
ethnarch instead of king, and of reserving Gaza, 
Gadara, and Hippos as parts of the province of Syria 
(Ant. xvii. 11, 1-5). 

262. A sad condition of affairs faced Antipas and 
Archelaus as they came back to their respective prov- 
inces. In Galilee and Judea alike were the ruins of 
many desolated villages, and thousands of lives had 
paid the penalty of rebellion. No welcome from the 
people awaited these rulers and each set about the 
furtherance of his own policy in his own way. The 
history of the land now becomes the history of three 
separate provinces. 

263. Archelaus proved to be in the completest sense 
the son of his father. He was the worst of all the 
sons and his short reign was * summed up to the em- 
peror as " barbarous and tyrannical." They endured 
its recklessness for nine years and then made such an 
effectual showing of its desperate character to Augus- 
tus that in 6 A. D. he banished the man to Vienne in 
Gaul and annexed his dominions to the province of 
Syria. It is noteworthy that the delegation which 
journeyed to Rome to petition for his removal was 


made up of both Jews and Samaritans. Archelaus 
went to no such extremes as his father in rash viola- 
tions of the religious sensibilities of the Jews, although 
his marriage with Galphyra gave great offence. She 
had once been the wife of Alexander, his half-brother, 
and several children were the fruit of that marriage. 
This fact made her union with Archelaus grossly 
illegal. It was, however, his violent and arbitrary 
character that kept Archelaus constantly in trouble, 
and his useful and beautiful public works, such as the 
cultivation of palm-groves in the Jordan valley, the 
construction of an aqueduct to supply them with 
water, and the founding of a new city, Archelais, north 
of Jericho, could not atone for his own worthlessness. 
He was from the first a wretched failure (Ant. xvii. 
13, 1-5). 

264. A brighter picture presents itself in the history 
of the province of Herod Antipas. The man himself 
was cunning, extravagant, and self-seeking. Jesus 
referred to him as " that fox " (Luke xiii. 32), and such 
vicious qualities as had come to him by heredity were 
doubtless strengthened by his early life in Rome. He 
was no favorite with Augustus, who understood his 
treacherous nature,, but it would seem as if this very 
characteristic commended him to Tiberius, who was 
his firm friend and supporter. By proper prudence 
and caution he maintained a peaceful status in Galilee 
and thus avoided any complaint on the part of his sub- 
jects during the lifetime of Augustus. When Tiberius 
came to the throne in 14 A. D., Antipas basked in the 
sunshine of royal favor. The price of such favor, 
however, was the Idumean's willingness to play the 
spy in reference to various Roman officials in the East 
(Ant. xviii. 4. 5), 


265. Of all the sons of Herod, Antipas inherited, to 
the largest degree, his father's fondness for magnifi- 
cence, both in private life and in public buildings. His 
royal palace at Tiberias was an example of the sumptu- 
ous surroundings by which he gratified his extravagant 
tastes, and the city of Tiberias itself was but one of the 
public constructions which made his reign famous. At 
his bidding Sepphoris arose again from its ashes and for 
a considerable time was the capital and, as Josephus de- 
scribes it, " the ornament of all Galilee.'' He rebuilt 
the old town of Beth-Haram in southern Perea, and in 
honor of the wife of Augustus called it Livias. He 
also enlarged and made palatial the old fortress of 
Machserus on the heights east of the Dead Sea. It 
was with the twofold design of satisfying his own 
ambitions in having a splendid capital, and of gratify- 
ing the emperor, that, in the year 26 or 27 A. D., he 
built the city of Tiberias near the hot springs of 
Emmaus on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee. 
No expense was spared to make the city worthy of its 
purpose ; but the discovery of the site of an old burial- 
ground during the laying of foundations made the 
place for some time unclean to the Jews. Herod was 
therefore compelled to colonize it with a very mixed 
population, and as a result this new city in Galilee be- 
came another Hellenizing centre. Its government was 
Hellenistic in form and several of its public buildings 
were in the interest of the Greek spirit (Ant. xviii. 2, 
3; J. W. ii. 21,6, 9). 

266. Antipas was at heart a pagan. His conform- 
ity to Judaism was only formal. He lived for his own 
personal ambitions, but was shrewd enough to keep 
general public interests in line with his private desires. 


Still, even shrewdness will not always save a man from 
himself, and all the customary astuteness of this suc- 
cessful tetrarch did not at last avail against his un- 
governable passions. The evidence of this is furnished 
in a visit which he made to Rome in 27 A. d. Here 
he was entertained at the home of his half-brother 
Herod (Boethus), whose wife was Herodias. Antipas 
was fascinated with this woman's charms and shame- 
fully proposed marriage. Herodias, a descendant of 
the beautiful Mariamne, was an ambitious woman and 
was willing enough to leave her inconspicuous home 
in Rome for the palace in Tiberias. Antipas, there- 
fore, made arrangements to divorce his wife, the 
daughter of Aretas, and take Herodias in her place. 
Passion triumphed over every dictate of prudence, and 
serious trouble at once began. Aretas was made an 
enemy, and in the outspoken judgments of John the 
Baptist's faithful preaching, Antipas was held up to 
the contempt and scorn of Galilee. For this work 
of condemnation Herodias never forgave John, who 
paid for his fidelity with his life at a bacchanalian fes- 
tival celebrated in the palace-fortress of Machasrus 
(Mark vi. 17-29). The tetrarch had imprisoned the 
Baptist out of fear of a public uprising as the result of 
his preaching (Ant. xviii. 5, 2). When once the fear- 
less prophet was within prison walls, Herodias awaited 
her opportunity to compass his death, and the brief 
account given us in the gospels make only too clear 
the fatal weakness of Herod. 

267. Not long after this disgraceful scene at Machse- 
rus came the time of reckoning with Aretas. The ex- 
isting enmity had been deepened by quarrels over 
boundary lines, and in the war which broke out in 


36 A. D. Antipas was disastrously defeated (Ant. xviii. 
5, 1). It is not surprising that the defeat was inter- 
preted by the people as God's judgment upon the 
murder of John (Ant. xviii. 5, 2). The conscience of 
the tetrarch was itself sensitive. Its superstitious fear 
made Jesus to be John the Baptist risen from the dead 
(Matt. xiv. 1). It is also noticeable how careful 
Herod was to avoid a second deed of violence. He 
used the Pharisees to persuade Jesus to leave his 
dominions (Luke xiii. 1), and finally at the feast in 
Jerusalem he refused to pronounce the death sentence 
upon the Galilean prisoner whom Pilate sent to him 
(Luke xxiii. 6-11). 

268. As soon as tidings reached Tiberius of the suc- 
cess of Aretas, Vitellius was ordered to avenge the 
disaster of Antipas. In the midst of the preparations 
for the execution of this command Tiberius died, 
March 16, 37 A. D. Vitellius, who had suffered from 
the espionage of Antipas, then refused to carry out the 
orders of the dead emperor. Herod was in a critical 
position. Once more Herodias proved to be his evil 
genius. Caligula, the new emperor, was a warm friend 
of Agrippa I., the brother of Herodias, and advanced 
him to kingship over the territories formerly in posses- 
sion of Philip (Ant. xviii. 6, 10). Herodias was 
jealous of this honor and urged her husband to go to 
Rome and plead for the name of king. Against his 
own inclinations Herod set out for Italy. He never 
saw Galilee again, for Agrippa, by a messenger, antici- 
pated his arrival in Rome and laid charges before Cali- 
gula of the tetrarch's disloyalty. The fact, which 
Antipas was obliged to admit, that in the arsenals of 
Galilee was a stock of arms sufficient to equip seventy 


thousand men, was adjudged conclusive and Antipas 
was banished in 39 A. D. to Lyons in Gaul. His terri- 
tory was immediately added to the kingdom of 
Agrippa (Ant. xviii. 7, 1, 2). 

269. The least promising of all the provinces dis- 
tributed by the will of Herod the king was that which 
was given to Philip. While it was large in extent, it 
was poor and inhabited by a mixed population of 
Arabs and Syrians, among whom had settled Idumean 
colonists. Philip, however, was the man for the place. 
In striking contrast with all the other sons of Herod, 
he exhibited a disposition and purpose which made his 
rulership a blessing. He made the interests of his 
people his own and was satisfied to do the best he 
could for their welfare. An instance of this is given 
by Josephus, who relates that he was accustomed to go 
about with a small retinue of chosen friends, and that 
"his tribunal also on which he sat in judgment, 
followed him in his progress ; and when any one met 
him who wanted his assistance, he made no delay, but 
had his tribunal set down immediately wherever he 
happened to be, and sat upon it and heard the com- 
plaint ; he then ordered the guilty who were convicted 
to be punished, and absolved those who were accused 
unjustly" (Ant. xviii. 4, 6). For thirty-seven years 
he thus ruled, and it is no small tribute to his charac- 
ter and administration that where Roman generals had 
extreme difficulty in maintaining order, he kept peace 
and good-will. It is a fine instance of the superiority 
of kindness and justice to force in the management of 
a supposably intractable people. Philip was really a 
Gentile in spirit. He was the first Jewish prince who 
used images on his coins, but because his tetrarchy was 


so largely pagan in feeling, it gave no offence. He 
made his capital at Paneas, near one of the sources of 
the Jordan, and the beautiful city which he erected 
and made an asylum for all in need of protection, he 
called Csesarea Philippi. He also enlarged the village 
of Bethsaida on the northeastern shore of the Sea of 
Galilee and gave it the name of Julias, for Julia, the 
profligate daughter of Augustus. His wife, Salome, 
the daughter of Herodias, bound him in friendly 
relations to the court of Antipas in Galilee. In 
34 A. D. he died, and as he left no children, his domin- 
ions were added by Tiberius to the province of Syria. 
In 37 A. D. they were given by Caligula to Agrippa 
(Ant. xviii. 4, 6 ; 6, 10), 

270. Before turning back to unfold the history of 
Judea during the times of the early procurators, it will 
be best to complete the story of Jewish-Idumean con- 
trol by following the fortunes of Agrippa, the ruler 
under whom for the last time all Palestine was for a 
short period reunited. Before he came to power by 
the appointment of Caligula in 37 A. D., Agrippa had 
had a very checkered career. He had known the joys 
of brilliant social life in Rome, had gone the round of 
dissipation and by a reckless extravagance had involved 
himself in debts which compelled him to leave Italy ; 
he had even meditated committing suicide. At one 
time he was overseer of markets at Tiberias and, los- 
ing this position, took up the role of an adventurer, 
serving in any cause for a little money and, whenever 
he could, borrowing more. In this way he came again 
finally to Italy, where he would have been received by 
Tiberius, had not the story of his huge, dishonest debts 
overtaken him and aroused the emperor's anger. By 



insinuating address and specious promises, however, he 
borrowed of one to pay another. In the meanwhile he 
gained a hold upon the royal household, and a strong 
attachment grew up between him and Caius Caligula. 
The great hope on which Agrippa rested his future 
was that Caius might become emperor. One day he 
unthinkingly expressed this in the presence of Cali- 
gula's coachman and the man used the unguarded 
speech to avenge Agrippa's charge upon him of theft, 
by repeating it to Tiberius. The result was that 
Agrippa was thrown into prison, where he remained 
for six months until Tiberius died (Ant. xviii. 6, 

271. One of the first acts of Caligula was to restore 
to honor his imprisoned friend, and he accomplished 
this in a truly royal manner. He put a diadem upon 
Agrippa's unworthy head and appointed him king 
over the tetrarchies of Philip and Lysanias. Agrippa 
did not return to Palestine, however, until 39 A. D., 
and while there he wrote the letter to Caligula which 
caused the banishment of Antipas and prepared the 
way for the addition of the tetrarch's territories to his 
new kingdom. Meanwhile Caligula was manifesting 
that form of insanity which involved him in wide- 
spread trouble. He became firmly convinced of his 
divinity and regarded any refusal to worship him as 
an evidence of personal hostility (Ant. xviii. 7, 2; 
xix. 1,1). The Jews were thus forced into antago- 
nism to the emperor, and the first outbreak occurred 
in Alexandria, as Agrippa was passing through from 
Rome to Palestine in August, 38 A. D. Though the 
Jewish king was scrupulously careful about provoking 
any ill-will, his presence in Alexandria, in royal garb, 


was a sufficient pretext to give expression to the real 
motive, — namely, hatred of the Jews, — which im- 
pelled the Greeks and Egyptians to wholesale plunder- 
ing and murder in the Jewish quarter. During the 
whole time of Caligula's reign the burning question in 
Alexandria was concerning the worship of the emperor. 
Palestine could not, of course, escape the mad desire 
of the insane Roman, who demanded that a statue 
of himself should be set up in the temple. Petronius, 
the governor of Syria, was ordered to carry this com- 
mand into execution, and if necessary, with the assist- 
ance of the army (Ant. xviii. 8,2). The effect upon 
the country was overwhelming. "Like a cloud the 
multitude of Jews covered all Phoenicia " (Ad Caium 
sect. 32), in their eagerness to petition Petronius 
against the threatened sacrilege. Agrippa, who in 
40 A. D. had returned from Palestine to Rome, first 
heard the news from the emperor himself. Shocked 
and deeply troubled, he summoned all his resources to 
bring about a change of the emperor's purpose. A 
costly banquet and flattering attentions won the good- 
will of Caligula, from whom at great risk Agrippa ven- 
tured to make request for the rescinding of the com- 
mand regarding the statue. The request, however, was 
granted, and before new trouble could arise, Caligula 
was assassinated in January, 41 A. D. (Ant. xviii. 8, 
7, 8 ; xix. 1, 1-14). 

272. Agrippa now had an opportunity of saving Rome 
and ultimately himself. By adroit measures and pru- 
dent advice, he helped Claudius to the vacant throne 
and secured for him the good- will of both the Roman 
army and senate. Claudius rewarded him by adding 
Samaria and Judea to his dominions, so that now 


Agrippa was king over all the territory of his grand- 
father. Fortune had favored him beyond his highest 
expectations (Ant. xix. 4, 1-5 ; 5, 1). 

273. The brief reign of King Agrippa I. (41-44 
A. D.) was for Judaism a " golden day." Contrary to 
the prognostications which might be deduced from his 
previous career, this last Jewish king honored in the 
eyes of his subjects his high position. Whatever his 
sincerity, which in the case of a Herod is always ques- 
tionable, he observed with care the requirements of 
the law. " He loved to live continually at Jerusalem 
and was careful in the observance of the laws of his 
country," says Josephus. "He kept himself entirely 
pure ; nor did any day pass over his head without its 
appointed sacrifice" (Ant. xix. 7, 3). To the Phar- 
isees he brought back the good old days of Alexandra, 
and they were ready to call him u brother," despite 
the Idumean blood in his veins (Mishna Sota vii. 8). 
The real Herod in him is nevertheless revealed in the 
fact that with all this devotion to Jewish prejudices, 
he was a patron of Greek culture in a city like Berytus 
outside of his own domains. He erected in that city 
a theatre, an amphitheatre, and thoroughly enjoyed 
Greek games whenever he felt that it was prudent to 
attend (Ant. xix. 7, 5). 

274. His persecution of the early Christian church 
was part of his Jewish policy. It was because the 
murder of James "pleased the Jews " that he tried to 
lay violent hands also on Peter (Acts xii. 1-3). 
With this twofold policy rigidly followed, on its strict 
legal side, in Palestine, and, on its liberal side, else- 
where, Agrippa prospered to the extent of quieting 
all opposing voices except those of the zealots. To 


them even he gave, by his honoring of the law, a fresh 
reason for wishing complete freedom from the Romans. 
The latter, however, watched both him and them with 
restless vigilance (Ant. xix. 7, 2; 8, 1). 

275. In the hour of the climax of his glory there 
came to Agrippa the grim messenger of death. At a 
festival in Csesarea he appeared upon the judgment 
seat in a garment heavily overladen with silver ; and 
as the sun was reflected from the splendid robe, the 
people cried out in response to his words, " The voice 
of a god ! The voice of a god ! " The cry was as 
music to the ears of the king, but even while he lis- 
tened, he was seized with severe internal pains, and 
carried into the palace near by, where in five days he 
died. Agrippa left a son bearing his name, but as he 
was only seventeen years old, the advisers of Claudius 
urged that the risk of intrusting the government to 
an inexperienced young man was too great. All 
Palestine, therefore, again came under the control of 
a Roman procurator (Ant. xix. 9, 2). 



276. The chief, pressing desire of the Jewish depu- 
tation which appeared before Augustus while he was 
considering Herod's will was "that they might be 
delivered from kingly and similar governments and be 
added to Syria " (Ant. xvii. 11, 2). The hope which 
gave cogency to this petition was that the people in 
direct relations with Rome would have better govern- 
ment, less friction, and larger freedom. In any other 
land than Judea such a hope might have been realized 
under the helpful hand of Roman direction. To the 
Jews it could prove only delusive, since Judaism 
knew no interpretation of freedom which did not con- 
form clearly to the standards of the Mosaic and tradi- 
tional law. 

2T7. The removal of Archelaus gave to expectation 
a keen edge. Augustus had been led by experience 
to modify his policy regarding vassal states within the 
empire, and was ready to take Judea under imperial 
supervision. The method by which this was accom- 
plished was not what the Jews had looked for, and the 
results were more and more disastrous. In 27 B. C, 
Augustus divided with the Senate the care of the 
Roman provinces, retaining under his own direction 
those which were of military importance, and sending 
out to them, as governors, men of senatorial rank. If 


among these provinces any one was difficult to man- 
age by reason of the savage state of the people, or 
because of tenacious customs, an official of equestrian 
rank was chosen to take charge of affairs. Syria had 
thus a governor of high rank who was known as 
"legate," while Judea was of the exceptional class 
and was supervised by a procurator. This procurator 
resided at Csesarea, was allowed a small army of 
auxiliary troops, — that is, troops gathered from the 
province, — received his salary from the imperial treas- 
ury, exercised supreme judicial authority within the 
province, deciding matters of life and death, and 
administered the department of finance. Until the 
time of Agrippa I., he also could appoint the high- 
priest. He was not entirely independent of the legate 
of Syria on one side, while, on the other, the Sanhedrin 
jealously guarded its prerogatives. The procurator's 
position was, indeed, so critical and potential that it 
could be disastrously used, if he himself were corrupt 
and self-seeking. Furthermore, the Roman subaltern 
officials felt far less concern than did the Herods for 
the legal prescriptions of the Pharisees and scribes. 
It is not strange, therefore, that the beginning of the 
end dates from the arrival of these "governors" in 
Judea. They were, almost without exception, sources 
of strife and disintegration. In their coming, the 
Jews discovered that it was not so much this or that 
form of foreign control that was the real cause of dis- 
satisfaction and unrest as the foreign control itself. 
This, in any form, was fundamentally opposed to a 
true theocracy. 

278. The first requirement of the new order of 
affairs brought this undertone of thought and feeling 


to distinct realization. For the purposes of taxation 
a knowledge of the number and character of the popu- 
lation was indispensable. Augustus therefore ap- 
pointed Quirinius, the new legate of Syria, to the 
work of reorganizing the administration of Judea 
upon Roman principles. A part of his duty was to 
take a census of the people. To Quirinius the task 
seemed simple enough. He had only to follow out 
the methods that had for a long time been familiar to 
Roman officials. These were to count the communi- 
ties either according to houses or according to families, 
in order to secure a basis for the poll tax (tributum 
capitis) and to divide the fields, survey the separate 
divisions, and estimate their relative values as a basis 
for the land tax (tributum agri). To the astonishment 
of the legate, both measures met with stout opposi- 
tion. They were clearly opposed to the spirit of the 
Jewish law. The poll tax was looked upon as a mark 
of slavery (Ant. xviii. 1, 1), and the land tax un- 
dermined the doctrine that to the Lord alone as the 
owner of the land did they owe payment for the bless- 
ings that came to them in the way of fruits and har » 
vests (J. W. ii. 8, 1). Quirinius, however, was not 
a man to be balked r by mere religious prejudices. He 
had resolutely faced stern necessities before his ap- 
pointment to Syria, and he determined that the com- 
mand of the emperor should be forthwith executed. 
Joazar, the high-priest, was able to induce the people 
in and around Jerusalem to submit, but the fierce 
spirit of antagonism was wide -spread and ready to 
answer any appeal to open rebellion. 

279. At this time was formed that band of patriots 
whose watchword was the old Maccabean cry of zeal 


for the law. Their creed was, " No Lord but Jehovah ; 
no tax but that to the temple; no friend but the 
zealot." Josephus calls them "a new school " (Ant. 
xviii. 1, 6). They were rather the extreme exponents 
of the old school of the Pharisees. They magnified 
the law and with impatient spirit sought to hasten the 
coming of the Messiah. Judas, called the "Galilean," 
led this new party, and his passionate enthusiasm was 
disastrously contagious. No mild means were in the 
mind of this determined rebel against Roman author- 
ity. He justified his violence and cruelty by a pro- 
fessed singleness of devotion to God and his law (Ant. 
xviii. 1, 1). He was, as Hausrath describes him, " one 
of the historic, holy simpletons who aim at what is 
impossible and run their heads against walls; effect- 
ing nothing outwardly, and yet exercising the greatest 
influence because they leave an irresistible example 
behind them " (ii. p. 79). Judas was defeated and 
killed (Acts v. 37), but the spirit which he embodied 
lived on, and in the final struggle of the nation, defied 
to the last expiring breath the Roman armies. 

280. Such was the beginning of Roman administra- 
tion in Judea. No emperor attempted another census 
according to Roman methods. The people were at 
this time numbered and the taxes collected under the 
supervision of the procurator. The customs were 
farmed out to men who committed their collection to 
tax-gatherers. Our New Testament gives us some 
conception of the social status of these collectors of 
custom. They were of the refuse of the land ; often 
associates of harlots; always despised and shunned 
(Matt. xi. 19; xxi. 31). 

"281. Of the first four procurators, Coponius, 6-9 


A. D., Ambivius, 9-12 A. d., Rufus, 12-15 A. D., and 
Gratus, 15-26 A. d., comparatively little is known. 
They undoubtedly went up with an extra force of 
soldiery to the feast at Jerusalem to insure order; 
they visited all parts of the provinces and attended to 
grievances ; they superintended the collection of taxes 
and kept the emperor informed in regard to all matters 
under their care. During this time the Sanhedrin, 
the highest tribunal of the nation, enjoyed a large 
degree of power. Herod had largely made it his tool. 
Now it became again the supreme court for all im- 
portant matters pertaining to the law of Moses. Its 
jurisdiction was confined to Judea, though its general 
decisions had recognition far and wide in Judaism. 
In Judea itself it did not interfere in the sphere of 
the local courts of the eleven toparchies into which the 
province was divided, but reserved its deliberations 
for questions of national import. It passed laws, 
executed justice, tried false prophets, settled ques- 
tions of doctrine, watched over priestly families to 
insure purity of descent; in a word, it was a court 
exercising legislative, administrative, and judicial func- 
tions. At the head of it was the high-priest and 
among its seventy members were found aristocratic 
priests, eminent scribes and elders, or men of years and 
experience (Matt. xvi. 21). These scribes and elders 
belonged to the party of the Pharisees. The Sad- 
ducean party, however, was well represented; but it 
is noteworthy that the scribes were the most influen- 
tial, since they were in touch with the people (Ant. 
xviii. 1, 4). Roman citizens in Judea were not under 
its oversight unless they profaned the temple (J. W. 
vi. 2, 4), and the procurator, while he had the power 


of calling the Sanhedrin together, was not needed to 
give validity to its sentences except in case of death. 
The functions and scope of the activity of the Sanhe- 
drin show the large measure of local liberty given by 
the Romans to the Jews, but, notwithstanding the 
outward appearance of tranquillity, there still existed 
the secret restlessness of discontent. 

282. Hints of this restlessness are given in the fear 
of commotion in Judea over the burdensome taxation 
in the time of Valerius Gratus (Tac. An. ii. 42, 43), 
and in references to the irrepressible activity of the 
zealots (Ant. xviii. 1, 6). The true situation, how- 
ever, is revealed in the procuratorship of Pontius 
Pilate (26-36 A. d.), regarding whom more detailed 
information is given us. His contemporary, Agrippa 
I., describes him as a man of "unbending and reck- 
lessly hard character " (Ad Caium, sect. 38), and the 
record of his deeds confirms the description. He 
began his official career with an attempt to cure the 
Jews of their irrational prejudice against the presence 
of the army flags in Jerusalem, because on them was 
the figure of the emperor. At Pilate's command the 
soldiers entered the city at night bearing these flags. 
It is evidence enough of the interest of the people in 
the pressing questions of the law and Roman rule that 
they went down "in great numbers" to Csesarea to 
protest, and were in no wise intimidated by the drawn 
swords of the soldiers. With necks bared they in- 
vited death rather than submit to the profanation of 
Jerusalem (Ant. xviii. 3, 1). The spirit of the zealots 
was very much alive, and Pilate felt it wise to yield. 
"When afterward he took the temple treasures to build 
an aqueduct for the water supply of Jerusalem, even 


this laudable deed stirred the city to its depths, and 
the procurator won new hatred by the terrible massa- 
cre he commanded (Ant. xviii. 3, 2). Not satisfied 
with his insult to the holy city by taking into it the 
flags, he determined to set up votive shields having 
the name of the emperor on them. Once more the 
city was in an uproar, and only the good sense of the 
emperor, who ordered the shields taken away, saved 
another calamity. It is not difficult to imagine the 
feelings of this disdainful ruler when the Jews dragged 
before him the quiet, earnest teacher of Galilee with a 
charge of seditious plotting against Rome. Because 
Judas, the Galilean, had done that, these same Jews 
honored his name. The artifice was plain enough to 
the procurator, and only because of his own pitiable 
weakness has his name been indissolubly linked with 
the most significant crime of history. The career of 
this ignoble Roman ended in the disgrace of dismis- 
sion, after a conflict with a large body of Samaritans 
who, deluded by Messianic expectations, had gathered 
at Mount Gerizim to await the consummation. It is 
unquestionably true that the emperors were in favor 
of a conciliatory policy in the treatment of the reli- 
gious concerns of t^e Jews, but that policy was effec- 
tively frustrated by such men as Pontius Pilate and 
the procurators who followed him. Each one gave 
fresh inspiration to the energy of the zealots and helped 
to prepare the way for the final catastrophe. 

283. Tiberius died before Pilate reached Rome, in 
37 A. D., and Caligula came to power. The attempt 
of this infatuated self-deifier to play a role resembling 
that of Antiochus Epiphanes in his treatment of the 
temple kept intense for a while the feeling of dis- 


quietude. Then followed the short, benign reign of 
Agrippa I., in which even the Pharisees almost forgot 
their traditional antagonism to the Herodian house. 
The happy time, however, was ended all too soon by 
the sudden death of Agrippa, and the whole land 
passed again under the supervision of procurators. 

284. Cuspius Fadus (44-45 A. d.) was the choice 
of Claudius for the responsible work of administering 
affairs, and his vigorous attention to the needs of the 
country promised well, but very soon after his coming 
he, too, began to commit the blunders of shortsighted- 
ness. Hyrcanus II. had made a practice of keeping 
the costly vestments of the high-priest in the castle 
adjoining the temple, and in this custom Herod fol- 
lowed him. By some oversight, however, they were 
not taken away when the castle was handed over to 
the Romans, and the procurators had had them in 
their charge until 36 A. D., when Vitellius won the 
good-will of the people by placing them at the free 
disposal of the Jewish authorities. Small as the 
matter seems, it was, after all, of real significance to 
the Jews, for it was thus in the power of the Romans 
to interfere with the ritual of the temple. Fadus 
demanded possession of the vestments again, and the 
consequent disturbance was not quieted until a dele- 
gation, sent to Rome, obtained from the emperor the 
right of the priest to take charge of the sacred garments 
(Ant. xx. 1, 1-3). Shortly after this the custody of 
the temple and the right to nominate the high-priest 
were given to Herod of Chalcis, brother of Agrippa I. 
(Ant. xx. 1, 3). 

285. Claudius now changed his course of procedure 
in so far as to appoint a Jew to the office of procura- 


tor. Tiberius Alexander (45-48 A. d.) was a nephew 
of Philo, and, although he had renounced the religion 
of his fathers, it was supposed that he would suffi- 
ciently understand the sensitive conditions in Pales- 
tine to act wisely. An apostate, however, could be 
only an offence, and the uprising of the zealots shows 
that his mission was a failure. 

286. The crucifixion by Alexander of James and 
Simon, sons of Judas, the Galilean, had only quick- 
ened the rebellious spirit abroad in the land, and when 
Cumanus was sent to take the place of Alexander in 
48 A. D., he had at once to face a serious and threaten- 
ing situation. Under cover of zeal against Roman 
rule, the disorderly elements of the land had resorted 
to robbery and destruction, for the most part, of their 
political opponents. All manner of desperate men 
sought to use the opportunity for personal gains and 
ends. Instead of meeting these conditions with firm, 
wise, and just measures, the new procurator provoked 
the people afresh and left the land worse than he 
found it. An insolent soldier among the guards, 
placed by Cumanus in the temple court, insulted the 
worshippers by an indecent posture. A quick, sharp 
punishment of th ( e offender might have ended the 
affair; Cumanus handled it in such a way that the 
outcome was an utter rout of the crowd by his soldiers 
and the destruction of a thousand lives (Ant. xx. 5, 
3). An instance of the kind of robbery above referred 
to occurred on the road near Jerusalem. Stephanus, 
a Roman official, was waylaid and stripped of all his 
belongings. As a punishment, Cumanus sent his 
soldiers to plunder all the neighboring villages. In the 
general recklessness of the pillaging, a soldier tore to 


pieces a roll of the law, and Cumanus only saved him- 
self from another bloody scene by putting the offender 
to death (Ant. xx. 5, 4). The worthless governor 
finally lost his position by his corrupt and cruel deal- 
ings in connection with a fend between the Samaritans 
and the Jews. A party of Galileans, on their way to 
the feast at Jerusalem, were murdered in Samaria. 
Cumanus, by reason of bribes, sheltered the Samari- 
tans. The incensed Jews, under the leadership of 
the zealots, took terrible vengeance on Samaria, and 
Cumanus then turned upon the zealots and severely 
punished them. Both Jews and Samaritans appealed 
to Quadratus, governor of Syria, who sent the ring- 
leaders of both parties with Cumanus to Rome (52 
A. d.). Through the aid of Agrippa II. the Jews were 
successful in defending themselves, and Cumanus was 
banished (Ant. xx. 6, 1-3). 

287. "Then Claudius sent Felix, the brother of 
Pallas, to administer affairs in Judea " (52-60 A. D.). 
This latter date has been recently disputed; the time 
of the recall of Felix has been placed as early as 55 A. D. 
It was probably in 59 A. d. (Ant. xx. 7, 1). The 
comment of Tacitus upon this man's career sums 
up his procuratorship. " With all manner of cruelty 
and lust, he exercised royal functions in the spirit 
of a slave" (Tac. Hist. v. 9). To meet his cruelty 
and severity, the Sicarii made their appearance. Their 
doctrine was the dagger (sica), and dexterously they 
used it in putting their opponents out of the way 
(J. W. ii. 13, 2). There was little safety in Jeru- 
salem, and all through the land villages were set on 
fire, houses were plundered, and all sympathy with 
Rome promptly and remorselessly dealt with (J. W. 


ii. 13, 6). Felix tried in vain to stay the mad fury. 
His severity was powerless before the desperate fanati- 
cism. In the impassioned expectation of the times, 
multitudes responded to the call of this or that pre- 
tender who promised to exhibit to them "the signs 
of coming freedom." An Egyptian Jew thus agreed 
to show all who would go with him to the Mount of 
Olives the destruction of the walls of Jerusalem (Ant. 
xx. 8, 6). As far back as the time of Cuspius Fadus 
the same overwrought desire for some miraculous 
interposition enabled Theudas to persuade many to 
follow him to the river Jordan, where he would divide 
the waters and lead them over (Ant. xx. 5, 1). It 
made little difference that such undertakings were 
summarily stopped. They were the symptoms of a 
fever raging in the blood of the people. Did the 
procurator by any means reduce the temperature, some 
new pretender would raise it again to the highest fever 
heat. The Pharisees, respected as they were, could 
no longer cool the hot blood of the ever-growing party 
of the zealots (J. W. ii. 13, 6), and among the priests 
in Jerusalem was developing that spirit of greed which 
not only destroyed their influence for good, but which 
did not hesitate to 1 leave the inferior priests to die 
from actual starvation (Ant. xx. 8, 8). Paul had 
abundant reason, as he stood before the licentious and 
cruel Felix, to reason "of righteousness and of tem- 
perance and of judgment to come " (Acts xxiv. 24). 
It was a sermon that might have been addressed as 
well to the nation at large. 

288. Two years after the appointment of Felix, 
Claudius was poisoned (Tac. An. xii. 66, 67), and 
Nero proclaimed emperor. In 60 A. D., Porcius Festus 


was sent out to Palestine as procurator. Whatever 
good intentions he may have had in reference to the 
land were impossible to realize. He found virtually a 
state of anarchy. All the dire tendencies of the time 
of his predecessors were strengthened. The Sicarii 
became numerous, the work of plunder and destruc- 
tion was increasing, and the people were still following 
the deceptive calls of self-constituted Messiahs (Ant. 
xx. 8, 10). In the midst of the confusion the procu- 
rator died in 62 A. d. 

289. Agrippa II., who succeeded his uncle in the 
tetrarchy of Chalcis, and who afterward came to be 
ruler over the combined dominions of Philip, Lysanias, 
and Antipater, had in the mean time appointed Ananus 
high-priest. This high-priest, while the country was 
awaiting the new procurator, used his opportunity to 
call before the Sanhedrin James, the Lord's brother, 
and some others, and, having accused them of break- 
ing the law, to order them to be stoned to death. His 
zeal against the church, however, cost him his posi- 
tion ; and with the arrival of Albinus, the successor of 
Festus, events began to move rapidly toward the crisis 
of the nation. What the land had to suffer from 
Albinus is best told in the words of Josephus himself: 
"There was no wickedness that he did not practise. 
Not only did he embezzle public moneys, rob a multi- 
tude of private citizens, and burden the whole people 
with imposts, but he released captive highwaymen for 
ransoms from their relations ; those that could not pay 
remained in prison. Every villain gathered a band of 
his own, and Albinus towered among them like a rob- 
ber chief, using his adherents to plunder honest citi- 
zens " (J. W. ii. 4, 1). The zealots could wish for 



no better furtherance of their cause. Riots were of 
frequent occurrence in the streets of Jerusalem, and 
these, too, between factions of the priesthood (Ant. 
xx. 9, 4). The completion of the temple at this time 
left eighteen thousand workmen without employment, 
an additional menace to the city; and Agrippa II., to 
whom appeal was made, permitted the use of the tem- 
ple treasure to employ these men in paving the city 
with white stone. The same king granted to the 
Levites the illegal honor of wearing priestly garments. 
The temple was thus the daily witness of ceremonial 
lawlessness, while the city and the land were given 
over to the atrocities of greed and fanaticism (Ant. 
xx. 9, 6, 7). 

290. The worst, however, was yet to come. As 
soon as Albinus learned that he was to be recalled, he 
attempted an adjustment of affairs which would appear 
favorable to Jerusalem, but which resulted simply in 
emptying the prisons and filling the country with 
robbers (Ant. xx. 9, 5). Gessius Florus (64^66) the 
last procurator, then entered upon the scene, and 
by his desperate wickedness cast even the rapacity 
and perfidy of Albinus into shadow. "He made an 
open boast of his crimes against the people; he prac- 
tised every sort of robbery and abuse precisely as 
though he had been sent to punish condemned crimi- 
nals. His cruelty was pitiless, his infamies shame- 
less; never before did any one so veil truth with 
deceit, or discover more cunning ways of accomplish- 
ing his knaveries. To enrich himself at the expense 
of individuals was not enough for him; he robbed 
whole cities and ruined whole communities; things 
could not have been worse, had he made public proc- 


lamation throughout the land that every one might 
plunder where and what he would, provided only that 
he, Albinus, received his share of the booty. Whole 
districts were depopulated by his greed; multitudes 
left their houses and fled into foreign provinces " (J. 
W. ii. 14, 2). The patience of the nation was now 
exhausted. It was ready to plunge into open, deter- 
mined rebellion. Unquestionably the ceaseless agita- 
tion of the zealots inflamed more and more the minds 
of the people ; but the stupid blunders or wilful crimes 
of the Roman procurators gave these enthusiasts many 
reasons for appeal to the prejudices and hopes of their 
countrymen. These reasons were diligently used, and 
at last the zealots had their own way. The terrible 
tragedy of the nation's death struggle with Rome 


291. The virtual declaration of war was a delib- 
erate and formal refusal to offer the daily sacrifice in 
the temple for the emperor (J. W. ii. 17, 2). Since 
the days of Augustus this ritual service had been 
faithfully observed. Only in this way could Judaism 
with religious ceremonial honor the name that in the 
pagan provinces was deified and worshipped. The 
refusal, therefore, was a direct, open repudiation of 
respect and loyalty. It was an act of war. In vain 
did the men of wealth and power, in vain did the 
Pharisees, and even Agrippa II., seek to persuade the 
revolutionists of the stupendous folly of their action. 
Momentary reversals of purpose rewarded the earnest- 
ness of the defenders of peace (J. W. ii. 15, 2 ; 16, 4), 
but just as the angry tumult of passion became in a 
measure quieted, a afresh exasperation on the part of 
the Romans stirred to their depths the tides of bitter 
feeling, until peace seemed but another name for 
cowardice and shame. 

292. The policy of Florus was irritation. He was 
eager to force the Jews into rebellion. Each resent- 
ment of his perfidy and cruelty was made by himself 
the reason for a more desperate procedure. A quarrel 
between the Greeks and Jews broke out in Caesarea 
over an attempt to dishonor one of the synagogues. 


Florus took a large bribe from the Jews with the 
promise that he would stop the insults of the Greeks, 
then left the city and refused to protect Jewish inter- 
ests (ii. 14, 4-5). While ill-will over this treachery 
was at its height, a demand came for seventeen talents 
from the temple treasury " for Csesar's use." Jerusa- 
lem was at once in an uproar. In sarcasm a collection 
was taken for the poor, needy Koman. Florus, that 
he might work out his will, chose to make much of the 
insulting joke and marched upon the city. He threat- 
ened vengeance if the perpetrators were not handed 
over to him, and because the Jews dared to beg pardon 
for the few foolish men who had been guilty of this 
presumption, he became enraged and set his soldiers to 
plundering in the city. In their savage zeal neither 
women nor children were spared, over three thousand 
being put to death (J. W. ii. 14, 6-9). 

293. Not content with this, Florus planned further 
butchery. He commanded the people to go out and 
greet two cohorts coming up from Caesarea, and at 
the same time charged the soldiers to ignore the greet- 
ing and, at the slightest manifestation of dissatisfac- 
tion on the part of the Jews, to use their weapons. It 
was with the greatest difficulty that the high-priests 
and others persuaded the people to go. Alas ! they 
went, many of them, to their death. The shrewd 
treachery of the procurator was disastrously successful 
as far as the shedding of Jewish blood was concerned, 
but he did not get possession of the temple treasure, 
and returned to Csesarea. 

294. While the city was still excited over this last 
atrocity, two notable men arrived in Palestine, Neapo- 
litans, an officer from the Syrian governor, and 


Agrippa II. One came to inquire into the actual situ- 
ation in the land ; the other to interest himself in be- 
half of both the Jews and the Romans. A conference 
of the peace party and of the Sanhedrin with these 
men led Agrippa to make a long and clever speech 
urging the people to abandon all thought of a revolu- 
tion. He succeeded so well that they promised allegi- 
ance to the emperor. As showing, however, how little 
a passing mood like this was worth, Agrippa's attempt 
to persuade them to submit quietly to Florus until a 
change could be made for the better, raised a storm of 
irresistible passion. Agrippa himself was obliged to 
get out of the way, and, with the decision to offer no 
more sacrifices for the emperor, the war began. 

295. The first aggressive act of the Jews was the 
seizure of Masada, the fortress built by Jonathan the 
Maccabean, and fortified by Herod. The whole Ro- 
man garrison in charge of it was put to the sword. In 
Jerusalem Eleazar, the son of Ananias, the high-priest, 
became the leader of the war party and threw his 
whole energy into preparation for the struggle. It 
was yet the hope of the high-priests and the leading 
Pharisees that they might avert war, and they tried to 
reason with the revolutionists, but to no purpose. 
They then changed their method and sent ambassadors 
to both Florus and Agrippa asking for an army to put 
down the sedition before it gained too great headway 
(J. W. ii. 17, 1-4). 

296. Agrippa responded with three thousand men, 
and the city was divided between the two parties, the 
revolutionists occupying the lower city and the tem- 
ple ; their opponents the upper city. Daily encounters 
made Jerusalem a place of confusion and death. The 


soldiers of Agrippa could not withstand the furious 
bravery of the followers of Eleazar, especially after the 
accession of the band of Sicarii, who, at the time of the 
festival of wood-carrying, gained entrance into the tem- 
ple enclosure. One important position after another 
was taken, and the royal troops were compelled to 
evacuate the upper city. At the same time the pal- 
aces of the high-priest, of Agrippa, and of Berenice 
were destroyed by fire and, more significant still, the 
depositories of the public archives. In this last fire 
disappeared a multitude of written documents includ- 
ing the obligations of debtors and the various claims 
of men of property. From that hour the mob had 
little to fear from men of wealth and these were com- 
pelled to protect themselves as best they could (J. W. 
ii. 17, 5-6). 

297. In rapid succession the revolutionists gained 
possession of the citadel of Antonia, destroyed the 
palace of Herod, discovered and murdered the high- 
priest Ananias, treacherously massacred the Roman 
garrison after a surrender under the promise of safe 
departure, and, with the city entirely in their hands, 
celebrated their triumph with merciless slaughter. In 
all this success, however, the zealots had not escaped 
trouble within their own camp. Manahem, a son of 
Judas the Galilean, presuming upon his achievements 
as a leader, gave himself the airs of a king and became 
insufferably tyrannical. The result was an outbreak 
between him and Eleazar which ended in the death of 
Manahem and many of his followers (J. W. ii. 17, 

298. With swift and terrible certainty hatred begets 
hatred. The whole land became involved in these con- 


flicts inspired by race enmity. Jews murdered pagans, 
and the pagans retaliated wherever they could. On 
both sides of the Jordan cities were pillaged and 
immense numbers slain (J. W. ii. 18, 1-8). The sit- 
uation was so serious that Cestius Gallus, the Syrian 
legate, determined to interfere and marched southward 
with a large army. One part of his forces overran 
Galilee, another took Joppa, and then the march was 
made directly upon Jerusalem. At the time of the 
Feast of Tabernacles in A. d. 66, Gallus pitched his 
camp at Gabao (El Jeb), about six miles from the 
capital (J. W. ii. 18, 10-11; 9, 1). The Jews imme- 
diately broke off the festival and made such an im- 
petuous attack that the Romans suffered severely. 
Gallus, however, drew nearer the city, and made 
several vigorous but unsuccessful assaults upon it. In 
the mean time a conspiracy of the peace party to 
open the gates was discovered and summarily pun- 
ished. It was perhaps in the hope that the counsels 
of these men would prevail that Gallus did not follow 
up what advantages he had gained and make himself 
master of the city. With no apparent reason he sud- 
denly, to the surprise of all within the walls, took his 
army away. Fear aud depression were at once ex- 
changed for the wildest courage. The Jews followed 
the retiring army, inflicting daily injury and reducing 
the Romans themselves well-nigh to despair. No 
sooner had they entered the perilous pass of Beth- 
horon than the insurgents saw their opportunity and 
with savage exultation fell upon the disheartened 
cohorts, completely routed them, and returned to 
Jerusalem laden with the spoils of war (J. W. ii. 19, 
2-9). With this victory the first stage of the war 


was concluded. Peace measures could no longer be 
thought of; the nation was inevitably committed to 
the consequences of its rebellious deeds. 

299. Preparations were now made on both sides for 
the impending crisis. Nero, realizing the gravity of 
the situation, ordered one of his best generals, Titus 
Flavius Vespasian, a man of sagacity and experience, 
to go to Syria and take measures to put down the 
rebellion (J. W. iii. 1, 1-3). The Jews set about the 
organization of their forces and the strengthening of 
their position. With the exception of those who left 
the city because they would not take part against the 
Romans, all classes now became interested in the 
nation's cause. Those who once urged peace sought 
to direct in organization. Pharisees and high-priests 
were alike conspicuous in this work. It was probably 
their purpose to treat with the Romans as soon as 
practicable and save the nation from its own folly 
(J. W. iv. 5, 2). At this time they could render the 
most telling service in the guidance of affairs. Jeru- 
salem itself was the scene of an eager activity. In an 
assembly of the people held in the temple governors 
and commanders were chosen for all the various parts 
of the land, and it is noteworthy that nearly all of 
them were representatives of the moderate party. In 
the eyes of the people men of noble station seemed, 
after all, their natural leaders (J. W. ii. 20, 3-4). 
The Sanhedrin probably managed the nominations. 

300. Strangely enough, the difficult and responsible 
leadership of Galilee was given to the clever but inex- 
perienced young son of Matthias, Josephus, the future 
historian. This rabbinical scholar, who, up to this 
time, had, in all likelihood, never handled a sword, 


was sent to prepare the province into which the Ro- 
mans would first come, and then to meet them when 
they did come. After establishing a form of govern- 
ment modelled after that of Judea in its provision of a 
Sanhedrin and small councils for every city, he turned 
to the work of strengthening the fortifications of a 
large number of towns and cities, among which were 
Jotapata, Sepphoris, Tarichaea, Tiberias, Gischala, and 
Gamala in Gaulonitis (J. W. ii. 20, 6). He also col- 
lected, organized, and tried to discipline after Roman 
methods a large army. Fidelity herself could appar- 
ently ask no more in the way of execution of a com- 
mission, and yet the zealots soon found reason for 
distrust and antagonism. Especially John of Gischala, 
who was, at first, a friend of Josephus, became suspi- 
cious of the real purpose of the young general, and 
turned against him with implacable hatred. He influ- 
enced the province by criticising the methods of Jose- 
phus as tame, and in reality friendly to the Romans ; 
by denouncing his aims as traitorous, and by inciting a 
demand for his recall or for his death (J. W. ii. 21, 1- 
2). Josephus, who had given some reason for these 
suspicions, was placed in a critical position. Only by 
craft, self-abasement, and, in one instance, by actual 
flight did he escape the fury of the zealots (J. W. ii. 
21, 3-6). Tiberias, Gamala, and Gischala, the centres 
of the revolutionary spirit, gave him constant trouble, 
while Sepphoris, with its leanings to the Romans, was 
also a source of anxiety. Despite these serious diffi- 
culties, however, he maintained his position by strategy 
and force, carrying on at the same time his prepara- 
tions against the expected invasion of the Romans. 
Even a weighty deputation from Jerusalem, with a 


recall, failed utterly in its mission, though supported 
by a small army and by a wide-reaching plot in Galilee 
(J. W. ii. 21, 7). The clever student of the Torah 
showed himself thus far equal to the emergencies of 
his really trying position. His hour of searching test 
was yet to come. 

301. The plan of Vespasian was first to bring the 
country into subjection and then with his entire force 
to close in around Jerusalem, and by its destruction 
finish the war. In the spring of 67 A. D. he marched 
with an army of about fifty thousand men from Ptole- 
mais into Galilee. Before leaving Ptolemais he had, 
at the request of the inhabitants of Sepphoris, sent 
them a garrison of six thousand men, an auspicious 
beginning, indeed, for the Romans (J. W. iii. 2, 4). 
The time had now come for the disciplined army of 
Josephus to show its training. Vespasian was ap- 
proaching. Alas for the months of toil spent in 
trying to make soldiers of these Galileans ! They 
fled hither and thither into the mountains on the first 
report of Vespasian's nearness. He gained a goodly 
part of Galilee without a single sword-stroke. Jose- 
phus and the few who remained with him took refuge 
in Tiberias (J. W. iii. 6, 2-3). 

302. Vespasian now turned his attention to the 
strongholds. At Jotapata, several miles north of Sep- 
phoris, a large part of the army of Josephus had 
sought refuge. Josephus, after an appeal to Jerusa- 
lem for help, hastened to the threatened city and for 
forty-seven days directed one of the most desperate 
conflicts of the war. Forty thousand men lost their 
lives in those terrible days. With stratagem after 
stratagem the besieged met the devices of the Romans, 


while their courage was that of men determined to sell 
their lives as dearly as possible. At last, through a 
deserter's account of the hopeless and pitiable condi- 
tions within the walls, Vespasian was led to attempt 
an entrance in the early morning when the exhausted 
sentinels would be found sleeping. The plan suc- 
ceeded and with wholesale slaughter the Romans 
avenged their own losses and suffering. Josephus, 
after several perilous adventures, escaped, surrendered 
himself to the Romans, and, upon being brought before 
Vespasian, cleverly assumed the role of a prophet, pre- 
dicting that Vespasian should himself be emperor. 
This prophecy is not improbable; it was simply an 
evidence of shrewd insight into the likely result of 
given conditions in the Roman world. Nero was 
childless, and Vespasian was a highly honored officer 
(J. W. iii. 7-8). 

303. After a brief respite at Caesarea Philippi in 
the company of Agrippa II., Vespasian marched against 
Tiberias, whose gates were without delay opened to 
receive him. Tarichsea, south of Tiberias on the lake 
shore, was soon after the scene of frightful carnage. 
Titus, the son of Vespasian, undertook its subjection, 
and the battle raged around the city and upon the 
lake. A bold dash made by the Romans by way of the 
unprotected water-front gained the day. All Galilee 
was appalled at the barbarous cruelty of Vespasian's 
punishment and most of the towns capitulated at once. 
Only Gamala, Gischala, and Itabryrium on Mount 
Tabor yet stood out (J. W. iii. 9, 7-8; 10, 1-10). 

304. Gamala, across the lake from Tarichsea, had 
been strongly fortified by Josephus and made a stout 
resistance. So severe was the loss to the Romans in 


their first attack that Vespasian had to nerve the 
soldiers to further action. When the city fell at least 
nine thousand of the citizens had perished (J. W. iv. 
1, 1-7, 9). In the mean time Itabryrium on Mount 
Tabor had fallen (J. W. iv. 1, 8), and Gischala alone 
remained. Titus was ordered to reduce this strong- 
hold. Fearing the vengeance of the soldiers on this 
nest of sedition if it were taken by attack, Titus 
sought to reason with the insurgents upon the folly of 
resistance. John, their leader, hypocritically assented 
to all the arguments of Titus and promised to act in 
accord with them, but begged that the Romans would 
recognize the sacredness of the Sabbath day. Titus 
readily acquiesced and removed his camp so far from 
the city that during the succeeding night John and 
his band of zealots fled to Jerusalem. On the next 
morning the inhabitants threw open the gates to the 
Romans. The subjugation of Galilee was complete 
(J. W. iv. 2, 2-5). 

305. Vespasian now led his army into winter quar- 
ters at Csesarea and Scythopolis. In the opening 
spring of the year 68 A. d. he resumed his plan of 
operations having as its aim the isolation of Jerusalem. 
All of the country east of the Jordan, except the for- 
tress of Machserus, was brought under Roman control, 
as were also Idumea and western Judea. Jerusalem 
itself was to be the next point of attack, when news 
came of the death of Nero in June, A. D. 68. Vespa- 
sian at once suspended hostilities and awaited word 
from Rome. Tidings at last came of the choice of 
Galba as emperor, and Titus was sent to Italy to greet 
him and to receive his commands. At Corinth Titus 
learned of the murder of Galba (Jan. A. D. 69), and 


returned forthwith to his father ( J. W. iv. 9, 2 ; Tac. 
Hist. ii. 1, 4). Vespasian again waited until June, 
when he began operations in Judea which gave him 
control of all the outlying districts and fortresses 
except Masada and Herodium. In July the legions 
in the East proclaimed him emperor, and the accep- 
tance of this exalted position compelled him to hand 
over to his son the further conduct of the war. The 
prediction of Josephus had come true. Vespasian in 
gratitude gave his prophet-prisoner freedom, and with 
it substantial honor (J. W. iv. 10, 3-7; Suet. Vesp. 

306. Meanwhile Jerusalem had become the scene of 
civil war with all its attendant calamities. As the 
defeat of Cestius Gallus had virtually put the aristo- 
cracy at the head of the revolution, so the subjugation 
of Galilee had sufficiently proved their inefficiency. 
It was time for them to give place to men of surer 
purpose and abler plans. So, at least, thought John 
of Gischala and all like him who, during the year, had 
gathered from different parts of the land to Jerusalem. 
The Zealots should be at the helm. This doctrine 
they put into practice by imprisoning and murdering 
some of the foremost men in the city. Then they 
appointed a new high-priest, Phannias by name, who 
was utterly unfitted for the office, and with a high 
hand they attempted the management of affairs. 
Ananias, the true high-priest, as well as other promi- 
nent priests and rabbis, made appeal to the people 
against this robber government. They arose and shut 
up the Zealots in an inner court of the temple. A 
worse enmity than that inspired by the Romans now 
held high carnival in Jerusalem (J. W. iv. 3, 1-12). 


307. The Zealots were in a critical position. They 
were as good as lost unless they could get aid from 
the outside. At the suggestion of John of Gischala 
two messengers were sent to the Idumeans with the 
story that Ananias and the moderate party were about 
to betray the city to the Romans, and that help must 
come quickly if Jerusalem, and those who cared for 
its liberty were to be saved. The Idumeans, com- 
pletely deceived, responded to the call as quickly as 
possible with an army of twenty thousand men. Upon 
their arrival at Jerusalem, the closed gates and the 
non-appearance of the Zealots made them at first sus- 
picious, and a terrific thunder-storm seemed to them as 
a warning from God, but in the midst of the uproar of 
rain and wind the Zealots sawed open the gates and 
guided their allies into the city. Once inside, the 
bloodthirsty, marauding spirit of the semi-barbarians 
broke forth, and the streets were drenched with blood 
(J. W. iv. 4; 5, 1). The fury of both Zealots and 
Idumeans was directed against the leaders of the 
moderate party, many of whom perished. At last, 
however, after almost incredible savagery, the Idu- 
means discovered that they had been deceived and left 
the city (J. W. iv. 5, 5; 6, 1). 

308. At some time amid these troubles the Chris- 
tians escaped to Pella. Vespasian's generals kept 
urging him to advance upon the capital, but he was 
satisfied that Jerusalem was rapidly enough destroying 
itself. As long as John of Gischala was within its 
walls, the Romans need make no haste. The fixed 
policy of clearing the whole surrounding country of 
foes could be steadily pursued. Meanwhile after the 
departure of the Idumeans the reign of terror contin- 


ued in Jerusalem. The ranks of the "valiant men 
and men of good families " were sadly thinned (J. W. 
iv. 6, 1-3). 

309. While John was tyrannizing in the capital, a 
certain Simon, son of Giora, bold, adventurous, and 
eager to command, gathered about him a strong body 
of men, and by successful raids in southern Palestine 
made himself feared not only in the south country, 
but in Jerusalem. The Zealots went out against him. 
In the first engagement they were worsted, and Simon 
was prevented from making an assault upon the city 
only by the insufficiency of his forces. Later the 
Zealots captured his wife, but dearly the ruffian made 
many innocent lives pay for this effrontery. And now 
the lawlessness and excesses of John's soldiery in the 
city suggested the feasibility of " driving out the devil 
by Beelzebub." The moderate party and many of the 
suffering Zealots invited Simon to enter the city and 
deliver them from John. Rightly does Josephus say 
that the remedy was worse than the disease itself. 
One more was added to the warring factions in the 
city. Three hostile armies were pitted against one 
another. Eleazar at the head of one party of Zealots 
held the inner court' of the temple; John and his band 
the temple mount, and Simon the city. Day by day 
Jerusalem resounded with the din of fighting. " The 
people between the combatants were like a great body 
torn to pieces." All that cunning and cruelty could 
accomplish was perpetually sought out and done. Lam- 
entation and death were in every house. While the 
daily sacrifice was continued, — a hollow mockery of 
service, — the buildings all about the temple were 
burned, grain-supplies, the very life of the city, were 


destroyed, and a good part of the city itself made deso- 
late. The insane fury of these factions, continuing 
through months, made the terrified and suffering in- 
habitants actually wish for the coming of the Romans. 
Nothing could be worse than the useless, hopeless strife 
which was, after all, but national suicide (J. W. v. 1, 
2-5; Tac. Hist. v. 12). 

310. At last the Romans did come. In the spring 
of 70 A. d., just before the Passover, Titus appeared. 
Incautious advances at first caused him much loss ; con- 
sequently, giving up thought of storming the city, he 
began a regular siege on April 23. While he was 
making his first approaches to the city, treacherous 
dealing on the part of John put an end to the party of 
Eleazar. The latter opened the gates of the temple 
for worshippers, and John smuggled in enough of his 
adherents, with concealed weapons, to gain the mas- 
tery of the inner court (J. W. v. 3, 1). Eleazar was 
himself murdered. It was not until the threatening 
work of the siege had begun that the two parties gave 
up their own animosities and joined their forces 
against a common foe. 

311. The siege lasted from April until September, 
five months full of desperate undertakings, astonish- 
ing endurance, matchless cruelty, and terrible issues. 
With force has it been said that " scarcely on another 
occasion in history has the spectator the same feeling 
of irredeemable ruin, of inevitable destruction, as in 
the case of the fall of Jerusalem in the year 70 A. d." 
Titus began his attack on the north side of the city, 
since everywhere else it was impregnable. Here he 
met the outer wall, or the wall of Agrippa, which 
extended around Bethzetha (see Appendix IV.). On 



the fifteenth day of the siege a breach was made 
by the battering-rams, and the Romans pitched camp 
within the city (J. W. v. 7, 2-3). Orders were then 
given to storm the second wall, which, running from 
the gate Gennath in a general northwesterly direction 
to the corner of Antonia, protected the lower city. 
Five days after the capture of the first wall an open- 
ing was made in the second, and Titus himself led the 
advance into the breach. Desperate fighting ensued, 
and four days passed before the Romans gained the 
upper hand (J. W. v. 8, 1-2). 

312. Titus now rested for a few days, wishing 
thereby to give the city time for reflection and change 
of purpose. Josephus was sent to persuade his coun- 
trymen to give up the unequal conflict. He was 
spurned and abused for his pains (J. W. v. 9, 1-4). 
Titus thereupon pushed on vigorously the preparations 
for an attack upon Antonia, and the third wall, assured 
that the deadly work of the famine was his best ally 
within the city. Indeed, to make its ravages more 
certain, he built a rough wall about the city that none 
might escape (J. W. v. 12, 1-2). The first ramparts 
erected against Antonia and the third wall were 
burned by the insurgents, and in order to replace 
them the country for miles around was stripped of 
timber (J. W. v. 12, 4). It was a critical moment in 
the siege when these ramparts were finished, for they 
could not be rebuilt without great difficulty and they 
were decisive of the city's fate if they remained. 
Desperate fighting ensued, and the Romans not only 
broke down the third wall, but also an additional wall, 
which, to their surprise, had been built by John of 
Gischala immediately behind it. Then followed the 


capture of the fortress of Antonia, which, by the order 
of Titus, was razed to the ground (J. W. vi. 1, 7-8 ; 

2, 1). 

313. The temple yet remained, and Titus made 
another appeal to those within its enclosure to sur- 
render, and so to save their sacred shrine from pol- 
lution. Josephus was once more the messenger of 
the Romans, but in vain (J. W. vi. 1, 1-2). Then 
timbers were brought from long distances and ram- 
parts built for attack. On the 17th of July the daily 
sacrifice, from lack of both priests and animals, ceased 
forever (J. W. vi. 2, 1). The simple statement of 
Josephus is alike a tribute to the ceremonial faithful- 
ness of Judaism, and a sign of its accomplished mis- 
sion. The smokeless altar was soon to be part of the 
debris of a desolated city. While the ramparts against 
the temple were being built the Romans suffered some 
sharp reverses (J. W. vi. 3, 1-2), but on the 8th of 
August the battering rams began their work. Their 
heavy blows availed but little against the massive walls, 
so the gates were set on fire, and through the openings 
thus made the Romans rushed, eager for vengeance. 
Titus tried to save the temple, but the infuriated 
soldiers were beyond control, and the whole structure 
was soon in flames. There was just time to secure the 
sacred vessels. Then the glory of Jerusalem disap- 
peared, to be seen no more. A merciless slaughter 
added its agonies to the awful scene (J. W. vi. 4, 1-7). 
" The great tribulation " of our Lord's prophecy was 
being fulfilled. 

314. In the upper city the revolutionists made their 
last stand. John of Gischala escaped with many of 
his followers from the temple and joined Simon, and 


they both asked permission to leave the country. 
Titus refused, and the siege of this last, unconquered 
section began. While the Romans worked outside the 
wall, Simon and John fought each other on the inside, 
each in addition destroying all who had any sympathy 
with Rome until about eight thousand perished. At 
length the ramparts were finished, the Romans scaled 
the walls, and on the 8th of September the whole area 
of Jerusalem was conquered (J. W. vi. 8, 1-5). Fire 
and sword completed the desolation. In the words of 
Josephus "there was left nothing to make those who 
came thither believe that the place had ever been 

315. The three fortresses, Herodium, Machaerus, and 
Masada were still in the possession of the rebels. 
Herodium soon surrendered, and Machaerus later took 
the same course. In Masada dwelt the fierce spirit 
of indomitable fanaticism. When it became unmis- 
takably evident that the garrison could hold out but 
a day longer, Eleazar, the commander, called his sup- 
porters together and proposed that they kill first their 
wives and children, then each other to the last man, 
who should commit suicide. By an eloquent plea, 
setting forth the brutal cruelty of the Romans and the 
sure gain to them all in the soul's blessed immortality, 
he nerved his hearers alike by fear and hope to the 
desperate undertaking. They tenderly embraced their 
wives, kissed the children, and then began the bloody 
work. Nine hundred and sixty perished; only two 
women and five children escaped by hiding in a cav- 
ern. The last man set fire to the palace and ran a 
sword through his own body (J. W. vii. 8, 9). In 
April A. D. 73 the war was completely finished. 


316. The Jewish state had fallen ; Judaism was still 
to live on. The Romans had triumphed ; the spirit 
whose inspiration and aim were in the law was uncon- 
querable. The temple was gone; the synagogue 
needed neither Gerizim nor Moriah. A dispensation 
had come to an end : the Messianic hope must wait its 
glad, certain fruition. Judea became the property of 
a Roman emperor; the wide world became the dwel- 
ling-place of the Jews. 

317. In the triumphal procession which filled the 
streets of Rome with excitement in the summer of 
71 A. D., John of Gischala and Simon ben-Giora 
marched side by side before the victor's chariot, and 
after them seven hundred chosen Jewish captives. 
With curious eyes the crowds gazed upon the sacred 
vessels of the temple as they were borne along. How 
great the honor of it all was is witnessed even yet in 
the arch which in the Eternal City bears the name of 
Titus. The Romans have gone, but the Jews are still 
the nation of the law and the Messianic hope. 



318. In a war involving religious convictions, the 
issue never alters the convictions. The truthfulness 
of a creed cannot be decided by the clash of arms. 
Defeat may be interpreted as chastisement, but not as 
utter condemnation. With its capitol and temple in 
ruins, with thousands of its defenders cut down, and 
with its land and cities in the possession of the 
heathen, Judaism yet confidently believed in the right- 
eousness of its claims and in the truthfulness of its 
hopes. The chastisement had been severe. It must 
only make surer fidelity to the law, in order that out 
of that fidelity might issue at last the Messianic bless- 
ing. Once and again since the days of Antiochus 
Epiphanes that earnest lesson had been drawn from 
national calamities. It seemed now to have been 
fairly burned into the mind of the nation. 

319. The Pharisees and the rabbis became the re- 
vered authorities for the people in all matters purely 
Jewish. The synagogue and the schools had made 
unconscious preparation for such a time as this. The 
momentum of at least two centuries was in the swift, 
all-embracing movement toward Rabbinism which set 
in a^er the fall of Jerusalem. The scholar took com- 
plete.y the place of the priest. Jamnia was made the 


new centre of Judaism. Here, under a notable succes- 
sion of learned men, the interpretation and expansion 
of the law was carried on. It made no difference that 
the sacrificial service had ceased. All the require- 
ments of the temple ritual were faithfully discussed, 
for the time was sure to come when, as in the days of 
Judas Maccabeus, the elaborate system of worship 
should again be restored. Pathetic faith ! Even while 
the rabbis and the people were diligently preparing 
for that future, the true Messiah was widening the 
borders of his kingdom throughout the Koman world. 

320. Naturally after the bitter experiences of the 
war, the Romans regarded the Jews with jealous watch- 
fulness. Even the temple of Onias in Egypt was closed, 
so that the nation should have no distinctive rallying- 
point. Judea was governed by a prsetor, and the policy 
hitherto pursued of recognizing the Jews as a national 
as well as a religious community was abandoned. 
They were allowed the exercise of their religious 
customs as formerly, but compelled as sign of their 
subjection to pay the accustomed temple-tax to the 
Capitoline Jupiter. The Jewish tradition that the 
Sanhedrin escaped from Jerusalem to Jamnia before 
the siege began is quite improbable. Certainly there 
was no Sanhedrin after the war, though the body of 
rabbis in Jamnia who formed themselves into a high 
court aspired to make this the equivalent of the old 
national supreme council. They had the satisfaction of 
seeing their decisions recognized as authoritative and 
of knowing that their meetings were the central point 
of interest for all the Dispersion. Indeed, such con- 
tributions as once had gone to the temple went for 
years into the treasury of Jamnia. 


321. Judaism had settled itself anew to the task 
which the chastisement of God had made only more 
definite and pressing, — obedience. While it discussed, 
expounded, applied the law, and at last codified all its 
results in the Mishna, it kept alive the hopes of the 
nation for the future. In those parts of the Apocalypse 
of Baruch and IV. Esdras which were written after 
the destruction of Jerusalem, and before the end of the 
first century, there are the same comfort for loss, 
the same inspiration to zeal, and the same promise of 
better things to come that in earlier distresses made 
precious to the Jews the Books of Daniel, of Enoch, or 
the Psalms of Solomon. 

322. Owing to the meagreness of accurate informa- 
tion, it is difficult to estimate the actual status of the 
population in Palestine immediately after the war. 
Galilee, Judea, and Idumea had, indeed, suffered im- 
mense losses, but in the comparative rest which the 
land enjoyed during the reigns of Vespasian, Titus, 
and Domitian, there seems to have been a rapid recu- 
peration. Meanwhile, led on by its hopes and goaded 
by the exactions of its conquerors, the regathered 
people were approaching their second awful crisis. 

323. Unmindful ( of the disastrous issues of A. D. 70, 
and heedless of all warnings concerning the strength of 
its foe, Judaism in Palestine, in the year 132 A. D., dared 
once more to risk all in war. The immediate occasion 
was Hadrian's determination to build a heathen city 
on the site of Jerusalem and, climax of desecration, a 
temple to Jupiter on the old temple mount. The out- 
rage was beyond endurance. All the pent-up feelings 
of sixty years broke forth in volcanic fury. The fret- 
ting, exasperating requirements of the Romans had 


worn on the temper of the nation until it virtually be* 
came insane. A clever trickster, styled Bar-Cochba, 
the Son of a Star, was accepted as the Messiah, and 
followed through suffering and blood to ruin. By his 
side stood the very pride of the schools, Rabbi Akiba, 
of whom tradition related that a thousand volumes 
would not contain the wonderful things which he did 
and said. Akiba, the Rabbi, the herald of Bar-Cochba 
the Pretender, — and both woful deceivers of the 
people ! Reason had again forsaken Judea. Had we 
any such record of this war of three years and over 
(132-135 A. d.) as Josephus has given us in that which 
ended in the fall of Jerusalem, it would be as full of 
daring deeds, pitiless suffering, atrocious cruelties, and 
bitter issues. Says Dio Cassius, " All Judea was well- 
nigh a desert. Fifty fortresses and nine hundred and 
eighty-five villages were destroyed ; five hundred and 
eighty thousand men fell in battle, while the num- 
ber of those who succumbed to their wounds and to 
famine was never reckoned " (lxix. 14). 

324. It was the last serious struggle for national in- 
dependence. Then and there ended, not the dreams 
of future national glory, but the desperate, useless sac- 
rifices of thousands upon thousands of lives in order to 
make those dreams real. Judaism, indeed, lived on, — 
a stern, uncompromising, separating power. With in- 
tenser zeal than ever it worked toward its ideals, 
spurning the Gentiles and making its own followers 
strangers in the earth. The stamp which the Roman 
period of its history placed upon it has never been 
effaced. In refusing the true Messiah it missed its 
splendid opportunity to become the great missionary 
force of the centuries. It is still in the nations, but 


not of them, — cherishing its traditions, claiming its 
prerogative as of the chosen people and revealing the 
vigor of its adherents in the commercial and intellect- 
ual life of the world. 

325. To a large degree the Judaism of the Disper- 
sion embodied the spirit of that of the home-land. As 
long as the temple stood and the feasts were kept, 
there was more than one bond of union between Jeru- 
salem and the remote parts of the earth. Contribu- 
tions for the maintenance of the temple service were 
regularly collected and forwarded through responsible 
deputies to the capitol, while at the time of the sacred 
festivals, the highways leading to the holy city were 
thronged with pilgrims. " Many thousands of people," 
says Philo, " from many thousands of towns, made pil- 
grimages to the temple at every festival, some by land, 
some by sea, and coming from the east and the west, 
from the north and the south " (De Monarchia ii. 1). 
The glory of his faith must have seemed to the Jew 
never more real than at those seasons of imposing rit- 
ual when from Babylon on the east to Rome on the 
west his people came from every land and from the 
islands of the sea to worship Jehovah. The fate of 
Judea was therefore of the deepest interest over the 
wide extent of the Roman Empire. 

326. And yet to these people scattered abroad over 
the earth, either by the issues of war or by the impulse 
of trade, the religious institution of most vital import 
was the synagogue. With its interpretations of the 
law and its calls to fidelity, it stood over against 
the environment of pagan customs and culture, and the 
varying aspects of Judaism in different parts of the 
world are the result of the interaction of this central 


force and its surrounding influences. Whatever modi- 
fications, however, of language, custom, or thought 
were thus brought about, the inmost life was true to 
the law. The Jew was still a Jew. 

327. Already we have noted in part the process of 
this interaction in the Judaism of Egypt (sects. 78- 
88). It reached its climax in the work of Philo 
Judseus, and through him exerted a telling influence 
upon Alexandrian thinking in the early Christian 
centuries. This noble, earnest, broad-minded thinker 
was born of high parentage in Alexandria about 
20 B. c. All the literary treasures of both Judaism and 
of Hellenism he made his own, and in the wide range 
of their characters and teachers one stood forth to his 
view as supreme, — the inspired law-giver of Israel, 
Moses. He was the teacher to all men and ages of 
the deep things of being. Hence when rightly inter- 
preted, he must give us the truth which philosophy 
had often only dimly apprehended. To show that he 
does, Philo applied with unsparing hand the allegori- 
cal method to the interpretation of Scripture. Much 
of its history disappears, all anthropomorphic concep- 
tions of God are dismissed, and philosophic views 
appear, which strangely change the simple faith of 
the days of old. While Jesus in Galilee was telling 
of the Father and his love, Philo was describing God 
as " the Simply Existent ; " while Jesus was showing 
himself to be the Incarnate Word, Philo was strug- 
gling with his conceptions of the Logos, making it 
seemingly only " personified reason." The great Alex- 
andrian was, as Keim calls him, "a man of fusion 
and reconciliation " (Jesus of Nazara i. 282). Moses 
and Plato had each a part in his conceptions and for- 


mulations of truth. His work is the finest fruitage of 
the Hellenistic Judaism of Egypt, — a Judaism which, 
after all, was deeply interested in all the conflicts 
between the Jewish and the heathen world. 

328. As the result of Caligula's insane desire to be 
worshipped, a terrible persecution in the year 38 A. d. 
swept away much of the costly property and many 
lives of the Jews in Alexandria. Philo was sent to 
Rome to make appeal to Caligula himself, but gained 
little satisfaction. Only the death of the emperor 
ended the bloody disputes over this maddening issue. 
With all its openness to the influences of surrounding 
culture, Alexandria's Judaism did not depart from the 
great underlying principles of her faith. 

329. It is well just at this point to emphasize, as 
contrary to Caligula's procedure, the generally favor- 
ing policy of the Roman emperors toward the Jews of 
the Dispersion. Such instances as their banishment 
from Rome by Tiberius in A. D. 19 (Ant. xviii. 3, 
5), and later by Claudius (Acts xviii. 2), are ex- 
ceptional and had their occasion in the conduct of the 
Jews themselves, as did also the terrible massacres of 
the times of Trajan and Hadrian. The right to 
assemble unmolested in their synagogues where, in- 
deed, they might have their hopes of ultimate, na- 
tional supremacy quickened, was graciously given them 
throughout the extent of the Roman dominions. Nor 
was this all. To avoid friction, exemption from 
military service was conceded to them (Ant. xiv. 10, 
6, 10, 13, 14, 18), and because their law was expanded 
so as to apply to all the activities of life, they were 
allowed their own tribunals for the adjudication of all 
matters purely Jewish. In many cities they enjoyed 


civic rights, and to them was given the privilege of 
becoming Roman citizens with consequent exemption 
from degrading punishment and with the right of 
appeal to the emperor. 

330. Such privileges help us to understand the 
extent, character, and importance of the Jewish Dis- 
persion. It faced the Romans in every centre of 
influence within the empire. In Africa, Syria, Asia 
Minor, Greece, and Italy its spirit was the same. It 
was really a contradiction within the empire itself. 
It resisted all fusion and demanded especial recogni- 
tion. Nay, more, it sought diligently, earnestly, and 
successfully to widen its outreach and power by 
sharing its blessings and hopes with all who would 
accept its teachings and life. 

331. The impress of this desire to save the heathen 
is upon nearly all Grseco- Jewish literature. It is 
apologetic in tone and intensely practical in aim. It 
offers to a sin-blinded age the cure which can be 
wrought by the vital acceptance of the doctrines of a 
holy God and a pure moral life. While the pagan 
world in general despised these " separatists " who 
thus appealed to it, and envied even to destructive 
violence their temporal prosperity, many listened to 
the good tidings and became "God-fearing" attend- 
ants upon the synagogal worship. 

332. From all these facts the twofold interest of 
the Dispersion is apparent, — one in the development 
of events in Judea; the other in the conservation 
and strengthening of all the influences of which the 
synagogue was the centre. Out of one came the 
thrill of anguish and deep indignation, when the 
temple fell in hopeless ruin ; out of the other, the new 


zeal to make the law and the nation's final hope the 
staying power of faith. 

333. Through the reigns of Titus (79-81 A.D.), 
Domitian (81-96 A. D.), Nerva (96-98 A. d.), on to the 
later years of Trajan (98-117 a. d.), the Dispersion 
remembered its destroyed capitol and widened the 
cleft between itself and the Gentile world. Domitian 
attempted some restrictive measures, but there was no 
serious disturbance. The outbreak came while Trajan 
was in Mesopotamia. Like a prairie fire driven by the 
wind, the fierce flame of revolution swept along the 
northern coast of Africa. In Alexandria and Cyrene 
multitudes fell, both of Jews and Greeks, while the 
island of Cyprus was deluged with blood. At the 
same time, in Mesopotamia Trajan's general, Lucius 
Quietus, cut down the rebellious Jews without mercy. 
The mighty uprising was finally stayed. It was 
apparently the desperate attempt of the Dispersion to 
bring in the dominion of Israel. Palestine was soon 
to follow the terrible example (sect. 323). Then 
with the political question forever at rest, Judaism, 
both in Palestine and throughout the world, gave 
itself to the working out of its destiny. So it must 
work on till the r fulness of the Gentiles is accom- 
plished, and all its old earthly dreams are glorified in 
the bright fulfilment of the true Messiah's day. 




Seleucus I. Nicator 1 280 B.C. 

Antiochus I. Soter 1 261 B.C. 

Antiochus I 

I. Theos 1 246 b.c. 

Seleucus II. Callinicos 1 226 b.c. 

Seleucus III. Ceraunos t 223 b.c. Antiochus III. the Great 1 187 b.c. 

Seleucus IV. Philopator 1 175 b.c. 


( 1 J 1 Antiochus IV. Epiphanes. 
" 175-164 B.C. 

(3) Demetrius I. Soter. 

I 162-150 B.C. 

(2) Antiochus V. Eupator. 
164-162 B.C. 

(4) Demetrius II. Nicator. 2 
145-138 B.C. 


128-125/24 B.C. 



(5) Antiochus VII. Sidetes. 

I 138-128 B.C. 

(9) Antiochus IX. Cyzicenos. 
I 113-95 b.c. 

(7) Seleucus V. (8) Antiochus VIII. Grypos. 3 

t 125 B.C. 

125-113 b.c. Antiochus X. Eusebes. 
(9) 111-96 B.C. 

(11) Antiochus XIII. Asiaticus. 
69-65 B.C. (deposed 65 B.C.). 


(10) Seleucus VI., Antiochus XI., Philip, Demetrius III., Antiochus XII. 4 

1 The numbers indicate the order of succession. 

1 During 150-145 b.c. the usurper Alexander Balas ruled. Demetrius was twice on 
the throne. While he was a prisoner in Parthia, Antiochus VII. ruled. 

3 After a reign of eleven years, Grypos was driven out by Cyzicenos, who ruled as 
sole monarch for two years. Grypos then returned and regained all but Coele-Syria. 

* These sons were in almost constant conflict for twelve years ; hence, Tigranes of 
Armenia ruled Syria from 83 to 69 B.C. 




John. Simon. Judas. Eleazar. 

1 161 B.C. f 135 B.C. 1 161 B.C. 1 163 B.C. 

1 143 B.C. 

1 135 b.c. 

1 135 b.c. 

John Hyrcanus. 
tl05 B.C. 

Aristobulus I. Antigonus. Alexander Jannseus. 

1 104 B.C. 1 104 B.C. t 78 I B.C. 



rcanus II. 



Aristobulus II. 
t49 B.C. 

Alexandra = Alexander. 
1 28 B.C. I t 49 B.C. 

t 37 B.C. 

Aristobulus III. 
1 35 B.C. 

1 29 b.c. (married to Herod). 

























> P*- 

— Ph 












n m 
o — 










■ © 




m " 

— 03 









- u 


«° 9 





©~ S 

"rP ©" 
±2 © 




Sd « | 


© . 










-I 4 

• H 










fc © 












i— i 

















. Pi 



-2 « 

o5 O 
d r- 


<D . 



d 0-i - 
-2 . © 

, CO o 

25 3 

'S ©^ 

c5 m 

_C! CD <+H 
£ ° 





© O M 

> ^ d 

«d -£ S3 

PlTj © 

© C3 
a rf3 cj 

Q CQ © 

HH d 



— O 




( , -s 






* in 



i — o 



rd ^h 


pG © 










— M 





d ^ 




i— i 






• fH 








• ^H 






»— ( 




03 . 








— d 














- "i'i. -.V 



» ? Z r ^%- \* ara \ =>*c - 

v* » is?i 

V *4-J Citadel <nfj 

; Lower /CilyA, \ Temple 

/ ("lPool <^ " i \ birlnsur< 

— §• 3 

/ riPool ^ST '/ \lnclosure 


Supposed line op Walls about Jerusalem in 70 a.d. 



Fob the study of the inner life and spirit of Judaism 
during the Maccabean period, it were no small gain if, to 
our sources of information, we might add the long list of 
Psalms declared by Keuss to have originated in this period 
(Geschichte der heiligen Schriften Alten Test. sect. 481). 
Indeed, with the smaller number acknowledged by Gratz 
(Psalmen, pp. 48-50), we should have an excellent store of 
material from which to form conceptions of the religious 
attitude of the nation in its struggles with Syria and in its 
times of crisis. There is, however, no clear and indisput- 
able criterion for dating any of these Psalms in the 
Maccabean era. Even among those who contend for an 
enrichment of the Psalter during this period, there is 
much diversity of opinion about the extent of that enrich- 
ment, except in the case of some four or five psalms. 
The treatment of the subject affords easy opportunity for 
purely subjective criticism. Specific dates are often de- 
termined upon slender evidence. It is one thing to see 
in the thought and phraseology of a psalm suitable means 
for the expression of a particular mood at some given 
time ; it is quite another to declare that at that time the 
mood produced the psalm. For example, the forty-fourth 
psalm reveals the deep trouble of lives that are " cast off," 
" put to confusion," " made a reproach to their neighbors," 
"a proverb among the nations," and yet had not forgotten 
God nor " stretched out their hands to any strange God." 
All this fits in a general way the situation at the time of 


the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes, but, if we may 
trust careful interpreters, is applicable to earlier troubles 
in the history of the people. So also in regard to Psalms 
seventy-four and seventy-nine, which are also confidently 
placed within the Maccabean era, there is the same possi- 
bility of earlier reference. The words, " there is no more 
any prophet," and the statement, " they have burned up 
all the synagogues in the land," seem decisive for the 
Maccabean date ; but it is noteworthy that the Septuagint 
correctly puts the word " feasts " in place of " synagogues," 
and that several particulars given in the psalm were not 
realized at the time of the Maccabean uprising. Such, for 
example, are the burning of the temple itself (lxxiv. 7), and 
the prolonged desolation referred to in the earnest cry of 
the psalmist (lxxiv. 10 ; lxxix. 5). The surprising success 
of Judas Maccabeus enabled the Jews to rededicate the 
temple within three years after its profanation under 
Antiochus. It requires a nice balancing of details to 
make it certain that the psalms do not fit into the situa- 
tion succeeding the destruction of Jerusalem by the 
Chaldeans. Interpreters are by no means agreed upon 
the historical period reflected in these two psalms. The 
fourth in the list of psalms, about whose Maccabean date 
there is some confident assertion, is quite indefinite in its 
historical reference^ so much so that it may be said that 
" there is no period in Jewish history known to us with 
which the position of affairs as indicated in this psalm 
(the eighty-third) is in complete correspondence." If, 
therefore, the historical situations indicated in the psalms 
give us no clear, unquestionable date, are there other con- 
siderations which argue for an earlier origin than in the 
time of the Maccabees? The answer to this question car- 
ries us into the region of the perplexing inquiries which 
arise in connection with the formation of the Psalter it- 
self. If one assumes that the canon of the Old Testament 


was virtually completed in the days of Ezra and Nehemiah, 
a decision regarding Maccabean psalms becomes simplicity 
itself. Because, however, to many such an early date for 
the completion of the canon is an assumption, we must 
seek for unquestioned data upon which to base an argu- 
ment. The first of these is found in the Septuagint 
Version, which contained the whole Psalter. Unfortu- 
nately we can only conjecture about the date of the com- 
pletion of this version. In 132 b. c. the grandson of 
Jesus, the son of Sirach, refers to a Greek version of 
"the law, the prophets, and the other writings." Were 
this testimony more specific in its reference to the " other 
writings," the case might rest here. The uncertainty, 
however, regarding the actual contents of this third group 
makes the witness serviceable toward establishing the 
fact of a canon made up of three distinct groups of books, 
but does not define the third group. Dillman finds no 
testimony in the Book of Sirach to the Psalter. Granting 
that the Greek version of the Psalter is to be dated as 
late as 100 b. c, we still are confronted with difficulties 
regarding Maccabean Psalms. These difficulties arise in 
connection with the titles affixed to the Psalms them- 
selves. Most of the Psalms accepted as Maccabean are 
found in Books II. and III. of the Psalter. The contents 
of these books may be conveniently arranged in three 
divisions : the Psalms of David, li.-lxxii. ; those of 
Korah, xlii.-xlix., and those of Asaph, 1., lxxiii.- 
lxxxiii. Such classification and arrangement as this, 
together with some facts that become apparent in the 
study of the arrangement, implies processes which require 
considerable time. Some of these processes are : (a) the 
grouping of the psalms which had previously received a 
common title, such as, " A psalm of Asaph. " (b) The 
redaction which is declared to have taken place by those 
claiming that there are Maccabean psalms, of the greater 


part of the collections forming Books II. and III. by the 
change of the name Jehovah to Elohim. It is to be noted 
in passing, that if the Maccabean psalms were added after 
this second process was completed, they, too, were made 
" Elohistic ; " and the supposed reason for this change is 
their insertion among the psalms to be used in the temple 
service, but their general tone was not suited to this pur- 
pose, (c) The arrangement of the entire Psalter after it 
was collected and the variation in the numbering of the 
psalms (see Sanday, Inspiration, p. 272). These pro- 
cesses, in which the most generally accepted Maccabean 
psalms are involved, require seemingly a longer time than 
their supposed origin allows. Emphatically is this the 
case with the seventy-ninth psalm, if the quotation in I. 
Maccabees vii. 17 (c. B. C. 100), recognizing the psalm 
as Scripture, is rightly referred. Uncertainty, therefore, 
regarding the historical situation, and grave difficulties 
connected with their admission into the Psalter, as it 
seems to have been collected and arranged, warrant no 
unqualified usage of these so-called Maccabean psalms as 
sources of information for this heroic period. 
Works for reference upon this question : — 

The Poetry and the Religion of the Psalms, James Robertson, 

The Canon of the Old Testament, Ryle, 1895. 

The Old Testament in the Jewish Church, Robertson-Smith, 

The Literature of the Old Testament, Kautzsch, 1897. 

The Psalms, Cambridge Bible for School, Kirkpatrick, 1891. 

The Psalms, Perowne, 1876. 

The Origin and Religious Contents of the Psalter ; also Jewish 
Religious Life after the Exile, Cheyne, 1889, 1898. 

Lectures on Inspiration, Sanday, 1894. 



The Maccabean period, apart from its own history, is 
significant in that the new development of the nation's 
life after the exile reaches therein a critical stage. The 
ulterior limit of the period is just this side of the range 
of those critical theories which have made the Persian and 
Greek periods so important in the life and literature of 
the Jewish people, and yet the period must be studied in 
the light of those theories as well as from the facts it itself 
offers for the elucidation of its character and significance. 
The recent valuable work done upon the literature of 
these inter-testamental times has added to our knowl- 
edge in such particulars as call for modification at 
certain points of our conception of the history as given 
by Ewald, Gratz, Stanley, Milman, Renan, and Holtzman. 
The invaluable work of Gratz needs careful questioning 
at those points where tradition is woven into the narra- 
tive and where the literature of the period is cited and 
used. In addition to the critical handling of events in 
the commentaries of Fritzsche, Grimm, Bissell, and Wace 
upon the apocryphal books, careful reckoning must be had 
with Wellhausen in his third edition of his Geschichte 
des Volkes Israel, 1897. Schurer's monumental work, 
The Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ, is a 
veritable treasure-house of materials for the student of 
this and of the Roman period, and it is matter for regret 
that the new edition is not yet at hand. Its conclusions 
upon the literature of these periods must be tested by 
the work of such scholars as Charles and Deane, whose 


study of apocryphal literature has been peculiarly helpful. 
Valuable articles embodying the latest results of criticism 
upon this literature will be found in the new Bible dic- 
tionaries by Hastings and Cheyne. 

Of the deepest interest to the student of the New Tes- 
tament is the development of Jewish theology during the 
two centuries preceding Christ's incarnation. In addi- 
tion to the works of Drummond and Stanton, The Jew- 
ish Messiah and The Jewish and Christian Messiah, we 
have a critical history of the eschatology of this period 
by B,. H. Charles, D.D., 1899. Weber's Jildische The- 
ologie auf Grund des Talmud und verwandter Schriften, 
1897, also presents a clear, full view of such theological 
conceptions as Jesus had to face. In Toy's Judaism 
and Christianity, the religious development of the Juda- 
ism of this period is set forth with discrimination and 
power. A rich store of materials for this phase of the 
history is to be found in Cheyne's Origin and Religious 
Contents of the Psalter, 1889, and in his recent work, 
Jewish Religious Life after the Exile, 1898. It is in 
the Maccabean period that the religious parties come 
clearly into the field of history. For the study of the 
origin, spirit, and history of the Pharisees and Sadducees, 
Wellhausen's Pharisder und Sadducder is yet of prime 
importance. Valuable chapters upon these two parties 
are to be found in Keim's Life of Christ, and Haus- 
rath's Neio Testament Times, and upon the Essenes in 
Lightfoot's essay affixed to his commentary on Colossians 
and Philemon. Morrison, in his Jews under the Roman 
Rule, 1890, also discusses with considerable fulness and 
care the problem of Essenism in Jewish history. 

The history of Judaism in Egypt is bound up with that 
of the different sovereignties in that much-ruled land. 
As a component part of the history of Egypt, the position, 
power, and ambitions of Judaism are set forth by Mahaffy, 


in his The Empire of the Ptolemies, 1895, Greek Life 
and Thought, 1887, and a History of Egypt under the 
Ptolemaic Dynasty, 1899. They all give a vivid picture 
of the background of Judaism in this period, as does also 
Milne's A History of Egypt under Roman Rule, 1898, for 
the Roman period. 

The greatest name in Alexandrian Judaism is that 
of Philo Judaeus. A recent work by Edward Herriot, 
Philon Le Juif 1898, gives a thorough study of this 
master of Graeco-Jewish thought. The book also em- 
bodies an interesting review of the interaction of Juda- 
ism and Hellenism in Alexandria. As a help to the 
understanding of the Hellenistic environment of Juda- 
ism, not only in Egypt, but elsewhere, Droysen's History 
of Hellenism is of much value. 

While research has been constantly active in reference to 
the literature which contributes to our knowledge of the 
development of Judaism, exploration has been equally 
interested in making definite the localities and scenes of 
its history. The results of the fine work of the Palestine 
Exploration Society have been given to us in various 
forms. An example of the value of a close personal 
acquaintance with the land as an assistance to the imagi- 
nation in making real and vivid the history is to be found 
in Conders' Judas Maccabeus, 1894; and for the entire 
history of the Jews in Palestine, George Adam Smith's 
The Historical Geography of the Holy Land, — a new 
edition of which is just announced. Valuable books of 
reference embodying the results of all recent geographical 
work are Buhl's Geographic des alien Paldstina, 1896, 
Starck's Lexikalisches Hilfsbuch Paldstina und Syrien, 
1894, and Stewart's The Land of Israel, 1899. The work 
of Dr. Bliss on Excavations at Jerusalem, 1894-1897, con- 
tains the latest material for the study of the topography 
of the Holy City. 


The conquest of the Jews by Pompey, in 63 b. c, 
brought the land into such relations with the Roman 
power that its history became part of the history of the 
Roman sovereignty. Rome's methods, policy, and changes 
in rulership have, therefore, a significant bearing upon 
the welfare and progress of the Jews. One of the best 
recent works presenting the interrelation of the two his- 
tories, Rome and Judea, is Morrison's The Jews under 
Roman Rule, 1890. The great histories of Rome by 
Merivale and Mommsen are indispensable to a full under- 
standing of those changes in the Roman world which 
had their effect upon Palestine. To be sure, the little 
land upon the eastern side of the Mediterranean was 
comparatively insignificant, but the Jews were always 
influential out of all proportion to the size of their land, 
and Rome's history affected them at many more points 
than at Joppa, or Jerusalem, or Ptolemais. The com- 
ing of the Romans resulted in a complete reorganiza- 
tion of the government. The political history of this 
period is carefully worked out in Mommsen's The Prov- 
inces of the Roman Empire, vol. ii., 1886, and in Mar- 
quardt's Romische Staatsverwaltung, Band 1. 1881. Keim, 
in his Jesus of Nazara, vol. i., and Hausrath, in his New 
Testament Times, vol. ii., have also valuable chapters 
upon the political Situation in Judea in Roman times. 
A recent work from the pen of Professor Ramsay, Was 
Christ born in Bethlehem ? has given new light upon the 
matter of enrolments during the reign of Augustus. 

In the department of archaeology Madden's Coins of the 
Jews, 1881, gives a very full account of the coinage of 
both the Maccabean and Roman periods. 

For a sifted and classified collection of traditions bear- 
ing upon the history of both periods, we turn to Deren- 
bourg's Essai sur VHistoire et la Geographie de la Pales- 
tine ; and for questions concerning the canon, Ryle's The 


Canon of the Old Testament, 1895, Kautzsch's Literature 
of the Old Testament, 1897, and Sanday's Bampton- 
Lectures on Inspiration, 1894, will be found eminently 

The following recent works upon this general period 
are a sign of the deepening interest in this comparatively 
unknown portion of Jewish history : Streane's The Age of 
the Maccabees, 1898, a work valuable for its treatment 
of the literature of the period ; Moss's From Malachi 
to Matthew, 1899, a concise, scholarly presentation of the 
history of the Jews from the time of the prophecy of 
Malachi to the birth of Jesus ; Fairweather's From the 
Exile to the Advent, 1895, a handbook into which is 
skilfully condensed the substance of four hundred years' 
history ; Mathews' A History of New Testament Times in 
Palestine, 1899, a vigorous, able, and pithy presentation 
of the salient facts and features of Judaism between the 
dates 175 b.c. and 70 a.d. ; and Judea from Cyrus to Titus, 
507 b.c. to 70 a.d., by Elizabeth W. Latimer, a vivid, pop- 
ular narrative of the political, religious, and social experi- 
ences of the Jewish nation during this long period. To 
this list should be added Canon Farrar's popular work on 
the Herods. 

Editions of Apocryphal Books: — 

Book of Enoch, Charles, 1893. 

Book of Wisdom, Deane, 1881. 

Psalms of Solomon, Ryle and James, 1891. 

Apocalypse of Baruch, Charles, 1896. 

Assumption of Moses, Charles, 1897. 

Book of Jubilees, Charles, 1895. 

Fourth Esdras, Bensly & James, 1895. 

Sibylline Oracles, Alexandre, 1869, or Friedlieb, 1850. 


MRP Mommsen — The Provinces of the Roman 

Empire, Vol. II., 1886. 
MtRS Marquardt — Romische Staatsverwaltung, 

Vol. I., 1881. 
SchJPTC • . • Schiirer — Jewish People in the Time of 

Christ, 1890. Div. I., Vol. II. ; Diy. IL, 

Vol. III. 

HePJ Herriot — Philonle Juif, 1898. 

St AM Streane — The Age of the Maccabees, 1898. 

DP Derenbourg — Essai sur PHistoire et la 

Gdographie de la Palestine. 

MCJ Madden — Coins of the Jews, 1881. 

Introductions to various apocryphal books, see Appendix VI. 

EwHI . . 

• • 

RePI . . . 


HmGVI . . 

• • 

CornHPI . 

• • 

MorJR . . 

• • 

MHR . . . 

• • 


Ewald — History of Israel (Eng. transl.). 
Kenan — History of the People of Israel, 

IV., V., 1896. 
Graetz — Geschichte der Juden, IL, III. 
Holtzmann — Geschichte des Volkes Israel, 

II. (Stade), 1888. 
Cornill — History of the People of Israel, 

Morrison — The Jews under the Romans, 

Mommsen — History of Rome (Eng. transl.), 

Holtzmann — Neutestamentliche Zeitge- 

schichte, 1895. 



SchJPTC . . . Schurer — Jewish People in the Time of 

Christ, Div. L, Vols. I., II., 1890. 
MilHJ .... Milman — History of the Jews, I., II. 


SchJPTC . . . Schurer — The Jewish People in the Time of 

Christ, Div. II., Vols. II., III., 1890. 
ToyJC .... Toy — Judaism and Christianity, 1892. 
KeimJN .... Keim — Jesus of Nazara, Vol. I. (Eng. 

HrNT .... Hausrath — New Testament Times, Vol. I., 

ChE Charles — Eschatology, Hebrew, Jewish, 

and Christian, 1899. 
HaB Hastings — Bible Dictionary, 1898. 






I. Maccabees ; II. Maccabees ; Jewish War, I. 1-6 ; Antiqui- 
ties, Books XH., XIII.; Daniel; Enoch, XXXVII.-LXXII. , 
LXXXIII.-XC. ; Book of Wisdom; Sibylline Oracles, Book III. ; 
SchJPTC Div. II., in. 6-13, 49-54, 55-73, 211-215, 271-288; 
Div. I., I. 77-99, 111-114; StAM 143-156, 187-196, 218-221, 
222-225, Appendix C. ; RePI IV. 297-313; V. 20-26; HmGVI 
II. 322-333, 410-436. 



EwHI V. 286-300; GrGJ II. 292-321; SchJPTC I., I. 186- 
212 ; CornHPI 175-193 ; RePI IV. 259-276, 289-296; MorJR 1- 
7; MilHJ I. 502-509 ; HmGVI U. 311-322, 334-335; DP 41-69. 



GrGJ II. 322-364; CornHPI 193-197; EwHI V. 306-318; 
SchJPTC I., I. 213-224; RePI IV. 314-329; MorJR 8-9; MilHJ 
H. 9-19; HmGVI H. 335-343. 



EwHI V. 319-326 ; GrGJ IU. 1-14; SchJPTC I., I. 225-239; 
CornHPI 197-201; RePI IV. 329-345; MilHJ II. 20-24; 
HmGVI n. 343, 359-363. 




EwHI V. 327-334; GrGJ III. 15-26, 55-58; SchJPTC L, I. 
240-257; CornHPI 201-205; RePI IV. 345-V. 4; MilHJ 11.25- 
27; HmGVI n. 364-375. 



GrGJ in. 26-54; RePI IV. 208-219, V. 67-86; MilHJ II. 32- 
35; HmGVI II. 344-346; EwHI V. 354-358; HePJ 54-105; 
SchJPTC II., II. 225-230, II., HI. 230-243; ChE 252-260. 



SchJPTC I., I. 258-271 ; EwHI V. 335-342; GrGJ III. 55-70; 
CornHPI 205-208; RePI V. 5-12 ; MilHJ II. 28-29 ; HmGVI II. 
375-385; MC J 61-73. 



SchJPTC I., I. 273-290; EwHI V. 342-354; GrGJ in. 71-86; 
CornHPI 209-211; RePI V. 27-36; MilHJ II. 30-31; HmGVI 
II. 385-394 ; MC J 74-83 ; DP 70-82. 



GrGJ III. 87-110; SchJPTC I., I. 291-312; EwHI V. 359- 
376; CornHPI 212-215; RePI V. 37-57; MilHJ II. 37-42; 
HmGVI II. 394-397; SchJPTC II., II. 4-43; HrNT I. 135-169; 
KeimJN I. 329-393; MorJR 296-322, 323-347; MCJ 83-91; DP 





HmGVI II. 400-410; CornHPI 215-219; EwHI V. 385-392; 
GrGJ in. 131-166 ; RePI V. 93-121 ; MilHJ II. 44-49. 



EwHI V. 395-402; GrGJ III. 167-181; SchJPTC I., I. 313- 
325; CornHPI 219-225; RePI V. 122-136; MilHJ II. 50-56; 
HmGVI H. 437-442; MHR IV. 163-170. 




Antiquities, Books, XIV.-XX.; Jewish War, Book I. 8-Book 
VII. ; Against Apion ; The Gospels and the Acts ; Plutarch ; 
Suetonius; Dio Cassius, XXXVII.-LIV. ; Appian,BK XI. ; Taci- 
tus, BK V. 1-13 ; Psalms of Solomon ; Assumption of Moses ; 
Book of Jubilees; SchJPTC Div. II., III. 17-22, 73-80, 134-139, 
321-381, 83-91, 93-108; StAM 204-212, 225-227, 227-228, 228- 
234; ChE 245-249, 249-251, 269-297; RePI V. 185-188. 



SchJPTC I., I. 371-391; EwHI V. 394-412 ; GrGJ III. 167- 
189; RePI V. 163-175; MorJR 41-57; CornHPI 225-230; 
MilHJ II. 59-64; HmGVI II. 456-460 ; MCJ 92-96. 




,EwHI V. 411-416; GrGJ III. 190-206; RePI V. 176-184; 
CornHPI 230-232; MilHJ II. 63-68; HmGVI II. 467-476; 
MRP II. 174-178; MtRS I. 406-407. 



EwHI V. 413-428; HmGVI II. 469-481 ; GrGJ III. 204-234 . 
RePI V. 212-226; MilHJ II. 65-77; MorJR 58-75; MRP II.' 
177-178; MtRS 407-408; HrNJ I. 216-270; KeimJN I. 233- 
24i; MCJ 105-114; HaB II. 355-357; HNZ 74-77. 



EwHI V. 429-440; CornHPI 234-237; HmGVI II. 491-494; 
GrGJ III. 235-246; RePI V. 227-250; MilHJ II. 77-86 ; MorJR 
76-83; MRP II. 179-182; HrNT II. 3-29 ; KeimJN I. 241-248. 



EwHI V. 441-449; HmGVI II. 495-505; GrGJ III. 246-261; 
RePI V. 251-260; MilHJ II. 87-97; MorJR 85-91; DP 145- 
165; MRP II. 182-183; HrNT II. 29-52; KeimJN I. 248-254. 



SchJPTC II., I. 207-305, 306-377; II., II. 44-83, 90-125, 126- 
187; KeimJN I. 296-328; MorJR 240-252, 273-295, 362-374; 
DP 176-192; RePI V. 269-278 ; ChE 162-199, 200-268, 269-305; 
HrNT I. 84-113; ToyJC 246-248, 258-266, 319-331 ; HNZ 147- 
157, 208-211. 



herod's sons and king agrippa 

SchJPTC I., II. 10-165; MorJR 92-118; GrGJ III. 262-272, 
339-389; RePI V. 261-268; CornHPI 241-246, 254, 257, 253- 
258 ; MilHJ II. 99-112, 133-139, 164-169 ; DP 205-219 ; KeimJN 
I. 253-275; HmGVI II. 506-521; MRP II. 183-184, 200-201; 
HrNT II. 61-72 ; HNZ 78-79, 81-82 ; MCJ 114-139. 



HrNT II. 72-93; MRP II. 184-191, 194-200; MtRS 411-412; 
HmGVI II. 506-513, 628-645; MilHJ II. 125-131, 170-186; 
CornHPI 246-252, 259-271; GrGJ III. 388-389, 461-472; MorJR 
119-152; DP 230, 247-261; SchJPTC I., II. 39-87 ; HNZ 79, 83- 
86; MCJ 173-187. 


MorJR 153-180; SchJPTC I, II. 207-256; HNZ 85-87; 
GrGJ III. 505-578; CornHPI 272-301; DP 262-301; MilHJ II. 
248-390; HmGVI II. 645-657, 664-674; MRP H. 205-220; 

MCJ 188-206. 




MorJR 181-206, 375-415; RePI V. 189-205; HmGVI II. 460- 
462; MRP II. 162-170; RePI V. 279-326; SchJPTC I., II. 257- 
321; MilHJ II. 391-497; MRP II. 192, 220-225, 230; SchJPTC 
II., II. 219-327; HtPJ 107-135; DP 366-438; MCJ 207-253. 




Abtalion, 177, 181. 

Agrippa I., 241; his career, 242; aids 
Claudius, 243; his influence, 243; 
his territory increased, 243; his 
persecution of the Christian church, 
244; death of, 245. 

Agrippa II., 257; his policy, 258; as 
mediator, 262. 

Albinus, 257, 258. 

Alcimus as high-priest, 45, 47 ; treach- 
ery of, 46 ; defaces the temple, 55. 

Alexander, procurator, 254. 

Alexander, son of Aristobulus, at- 
tempts to seize throne, 157 ; second 
attempt and defeat, 158. 

Alexander, son of Herod, killed, 210. 

Alexander Balas, 58; marries Cleo- 
patra, 60; defeated at Antioch, 61; 
death, 62. 

Alexander 'Jannaeus, made king, 119 ; 
besieges Ptolemais and Gaza, 119; 
defeat at Asphon, 120; alliance 
with Cleopatra, 121 ; offends the 
Pharisees, 122 ; conquests of Gadara, 
Amathus, Raphia, and Anthedon, 
121; his vengeance, 121, 124; his 
struggles against Pharisees, 123 ; 
defeat at Shechem, 123; war with 
Antiochus XII., 124; defeat at 
Adida, 124; three years of con- 
quests beyond Jordan, 125; death 
and funeral, 125 ; character of his 
reign, 125. 

Alexander of Macedonia, character 
of, 14. 

Alexander Zabinas, 100. 

Alexandra, wife of Jannaeus, supports 
Pharisees, 122; her accession, 127; 
notable facts of her reign, 128; 
appeal of Sadducees to, 129; pro- 
pitiates Tigranes, 130; death, 130; 
benefits of her reign, 130. 

Alexandra, daughter of Hyrcanus, 
182; appeals to Antony, 182; pris- 
oner at Jerusalem, 183; plots against 
Herod, 184, 189; death of, 190. 

Alexandria, Judaism in, 10; Jews in, 
75-77 ; Jewish literature of, 78, 86 ; 
persecution of Jews in, 242, 243, 284. 

Ambivius, procurator, 250. 

Ananel, made high-priest, 181; de- 
posed, 182. 

Ananias, murdered, 263. 

Antigonus, brother of Aristobulus, 
murdered, 118. 

Antigonus, son of Aristobulus, 168; 
effort to seize throne, 170; defeat 
at Jerusalem and death, 177. 

Antioch, 72, 73. 

Antiochus IV. (Epiphanes), 18; his 
Hellenism, 18; in Egypt, 20; op- 
position to Judaism, 21; persecu- 
tions under, 22, 23, 24; plan of 
extermination of Jews, 31; death 
of, 39. 

Antiochus V., Lysias guardian of, 39. 

Antiochus VI., 63; supported by 
Jonathan, 64. 

Antiochus VII. (Sidetes), drives out 
Tryphon, 94; besieges Jerusalem, 
98 ; death of, 100. 

Antiochus VIII., 100, 101. 



Antiochus IX., 101, 103. 

Antipas, see Herod Antipas. 

Antipater, plots against Herod, 210; 
sent to Rome, 211; trial and death, 

Antipater of Idumea, made governor, 
131; supports Hyrcanus, 131; com- 
pact with Aretas, 131 ; 156, 158, 160, 
161; aids Mithridates at Pelusium, 
162; aids Caesar, 162; at Memphis, 
162; his reward, 163 ; his increasing 
power, 164; death, character, and 
influence of, 167. 

Antipater, son of Herod, 205, 206, 

Antony, ruler of Syria, 168 ; in Egypt, 
173 ; in Tyre, 173 ; aids Herod, 173 ; 
in Laodicea, 184; death of, 186. 

Apocalypse of Baruch, 153. 

Apollonius, at Jerusalem, 21. 

Archelaus of Cappadocia, his daughter 
marries Alexander, 204 ; saves Alex- 
ander from death, 207. 

Archelaus, son of Herod, made king, 
232; his policy, 233-234; goes to 
Rome, 234; made ethnarch, 235; 
his reign, 235 ; deposed, 235. 

Aretas, battle with Antiochus XII., 
124; made governor of Damascus, 
124; withdraws from Judea, 125; 
defeats Aristobulus, 132. 

Aristobulus, 80; his writings, 81. 

Aristobulus, son of Herod I., 204; 
killed, 210. r 

Aristobulus I., son of Hyrcanus, made 
high-priest, 117; takes title of 
king, 118; encourages Hellenism, 
118; murder of Antigonus, 119. 

Aristobulus II., 127; attempt to seize 
the kingdom, 130 ; defeat by Aretas, 
132; relieved by Scaurus, 133; alli- 
ance with Pompey, 134; thrown 
into prison, 134; escape and return 
to Rome, 158. 

Aristobulus III., Herod's brother-in- 
law, made high-priest, 182; death 
of, 130. 

Assumption of Moses, 151, 229. 

Athronges, proclaims himself king in 
Judea, 234. 

Augustus, defeats Antony, 186; com- 
pact with Herod, 187; his policy, 
192; confirms Herod's will, 235; 
deposes Herod Antipas, 235; ar- 
rangement of provinces by, 246, 247 

Bacchides, treachery of, 46; cam- 
paign against Judas, 54, 55. 

Balas, see Alexander Balas. 

Bar-Cochba, 281. 

Berenice, palace burned, 263. 

Berytus, council of, 209. 

Beth-horon, Seron defeated at, 30; 
rout of Romans at, 264. 

Bethsaida, Julias, 241. 

Bethsur, defeat of Lysias at, 33 ; for- 
tified by Judas, 35. 

Boethusim, 196. 

Book of Enoch, 228, 229. 

Book of Jubilees, 152, 222, 229. 

Book of Wisdom, 81, 82, 83, 84, 230. 

Caesar, Julius, 159, 160; aids Cleo- 
patra, 162; relations to Antipater, 
162; reorganization of Judea by, 
163 ; death of, 166 ; mourned by the 
Jews, 163. 

Caesar, Sextus, 164, 165. 

Caesarea, harbor built by Herod, 198, 

Caesarea Philippi, built by Philip, 241. 

Caligula, Caius, makes Agrippa king, 
242; his statue in temple, 243; as- 
sassinated, 243, 284. 

Canon of Old Testament, 8, 23 (see 
Appendix V.). 

Cassius, in Syria, 159; defeats Jew3 
at Tarichaea, 159; governor of 
Syria, 166 ; his taxation of Jews, 
167; defeat at Philippi, 168. 

Census, by Quirinius, 248. 

Cestius Gallus, 264; advance on Jeru- 
salem, 264; routed at Beth-horon, 

Chasidim, see Hasideans. 

Citadel, at Jerusalem, 22; built up by 
Syrians, 22; attacked by Judas, 40 ; 
besieged by Jonathan, 62; cut off 
by wall, 67 ; besieged by Simon, 69; 
fall of, 88. 



Claudius, Emperor, 253; death of, 256. 
Cleopatra, protects Jews from Pompey, 

120; alliance with Jannaeus, 121; 

exiled to Syria, 161; 185. 
Coele-Syria, Herod made governor of, 

Coponius, procurator, 249. 
Crassus, consul in Syria, 159; pillage 

of temple treasures, 159. 
Cumanus, procurator, 254; banished, 

Cuspius Fadus, procurator, 249. 

Daniel, Book of, 7, 8, 9. 

Dedication, Feast of, 34, 35. 

Demetrius I., declared king, 46 ; death 
of, 60. 

Demetrius II., 62; treaties with Jon- 
athan, 62, 63 ; defeated by Tryphon, 
64 ; treaty with Simon, 71 ; restores 
Jewish independence, 71; expedi- 
tion in the East, 93 ; capture of, 94. 

Demetrius Eucaerus, governor of 
Damascus, 123 ; defeat by Jannaeus 
at Shechem, 123. 

Dio Cassius, 281. 

Diodatus (Tryphon), 63; declared 
king, 70. 

Dispersion, 284, 285, 286. 

Egypt, temple in, 74, 75, 76. 
Eleazar, brother of Judas, 29. 
Eleazar, the Zealot, 262; leader of the 

party, 272 ; murdered, 273. 
Emmaus, encampment of Syrians at, 

31 ; battle near, 32. 
Emperor, first Roman, 191; sacrifice 

for, ceases, 262. 
Enoch, Book of, date, 9 ; visions of, 

Essenes, meaning of name, 111; their 

laws and theology, 112 ; origin of 

customs and teachings, 113 ; their 

influence, 114. 
Eurycles, plot against Herod, 209. 
Ezra, Fourth Book of, 153. 

Fadus, procurator, 253. 

Felix, procurator, 255. 

Festus, procurator, 256 ; death of, 257. 

Florus, Gessius, 258; his policy, 260; 
attacks Jerusalem, 261; surrenders 
to Titus, 276. 

Gabinius, 157. 

Galba, Emperor, 269. 

Galilee, Simon rescues Jews in, 36; 
Judaized by Aristobulus, 118; 
Herod governor of, 164; Herod's 
campaigns in, 175; war in, 267. 

Gamala, 268. 

Gamara, 147, 223. 

" Genesis, Little," 152. 

Gerizim, destruction of temple on, 

Gischala, 269. 

Gorgias, defeat at Emmaus, 32 ; vic- 
tory at Jamnia, 36. 

Graeco-Jewish literature, 78, 79; 
philosophy of, 79. 

Gratus, procurator, 249. 

Hadrian, 280. 

Haggada, 222. 

Halacha, 221, 222. 

Hasideans, 27; 46, 47; their ideals, 

Hasmoneans, origin of, 29; 69, 97, 
155, 165, 168. 

Heliopolis, temple built in, 74. 

Hellenism, in Palestine, 15; influence 
of, 16 ; in Antioch, 72 ; in Alexandria, 

Herod I. (the Great), 164; governor 
of Galilee, 164; summoned before 
the Sanhedrin, 165 ; governor of 
Coele-Syria, 165 ; attacks Jerusalem, 
165; favors Romans, 167; flees 
to Masada, 172; in Egypt, 173; 
aided by Antony and Octavian, 
173, 174 ; King of Judea, 174 ; at- 
tacks Jerusalem, 175; campaigns 
in Galilee, 175; marries Mariamne, 
176; his rule at Jerusalem, 179- 
180; summoned before Antony, 
183; renounces Antony, 186; sup- 
ports Octavian, 187 ; destroys 
Hyrcanus, 187 ; executes Mari- 
amne, 189; executes Alexandra, 
190; under Augustus, 192; inno- 



rations at Jerusalem, 193; his be- 
nevolence, 195 ; his ambitions, 196 ; 
his buildings, 197; his harbor at 
Caesarea, 198 ; his Hellenistic policy, 
199; builds temple, 200; his sons, 
203, 204; meets Agrippa, 204; in 
Asia Minor, 205; his sons' plot, 
206, 207 ; invades Arabia, 208 ; sub- 
dues rebellion in Trachonitis, 208 ; 
trouble with Augustus, 208; kills 
his two sons, 208; sends Antipater 
to Rome, 211; his " slaughter of 
the innocents," 214; his will, 232. 

Herod Agrippa I., see Agrippa I. 

Herod Agrippa II., see Agrippa II. 

Herod Antipas, son of Herod, 232 ; 
his character, 236 ; his extravagance, 
237; his buildings, 237; marries 
Herodias, 238; defeated by Aretas, 
239; goes to Rome, 239; banished, 

Herod of Chalcis, 253. 

Herodias, 238 ; secures death of John 
the Baptist, 238. 

Hillel, 234. 

Hyrcanus I. (John), 89, 97; besieged 
at Jerusalem, 98; his policy, 101; 
captures Marissa and Adora, 102 ; 
subdues Idumea, 102; his coinage, 
103; captures Samaria, 103; joins 
Sadducees, 115; his death, 116; his 
prosperous reign, 117; leaves gov- 
ernment to his wife, 117. 

Hyrcanus II., son of Janngeus, made 
high-priest, 127 ; becomes king, 
131; deposed by Aristobulus, 131; 
reinstated in priesthood, 144; re- 
warded by Caesar, 163; taken 
prisoner by Pacorus, 171; muti- 
lated, 172; return to Jerusalem, 
182 ; death of, 187. 

Idumea, subdued by Hyrcanus, 101. 
Idumeans, come to Jerusalem, 271. 

James, the brother of Christ, 257. 
Jamnia, centre of Judaism, 279. 
Jason, high -priest, 18; exile of, 19; 
return, second exile, and death, 20. 

Jerusalem, besieged by Lysias, 43; 
walls restored, 67; fall of citadel, 
88; besieged by Sidetes, 98; sur- 
render, 99; besieged and taken by 
Herod, 177; attacked by Agrippa, 
261 ; disturbances in, 263 ; civil war 
in, 270 ; three parties in, 272 ; taken 
and destroyed by Titus, 276. 

Jewish independence, 71. 

Jewish schools, 217, 221, 223. 

Jewish writings, value of, 148. 

Jews, in Egypt, 75, 77; in Palestine, 
76 ; given religious freedom under 
Caesar, 163; persecutions of in 
Egypt, 242, 243; rebellion of, 260, 
262; seize Masada and Antonia, 262. 

Jesus, the Christ, 213, 229, 230. 

Jesus, son of Gamaliel, 217. 

Joazar, high-priest, 248. 

John Hyrcanus, see Hyrcanus I. 

John of Gischala, 266; flees to Jeru- 
salem, 269; 270, 271, 272; escapes 
from Jerusalem, 275; captive at 
Rome, 269. 

John the Baptist, death of, 238. 

Jonathan, 29; chosen leader, 53; ap- 
pointed high-priest, 59; alliance 
with Bacchides, 56; selects Mich- 
mash as capital, 57; honored by 
Alexander, 60; defeats Apollonius, 
61 ; treaties with Demetrius II., 62, 
63; besieges citadel, 62; aids Anti- 
ochus, 64; treaty with Rome and 
Sparta, 66 ; drives out Demetrius, 
66; made prisoner, 68; death, 69. 

Joppa, harbor opened, 89 ; 198. 

Joseph, brother of Herod, at Masada, 
172; death of, 176. 

Josephus, "Antiquities" of, 144, 145; 
value of his history, 144; his "Jew- 
ish War," 145, 216; leader in 
Galilee, 265, 266, 267; his army 
dispersed, 267; at Jotapata, 267; 
surrenders to the Romans, 268; his 
prophecy, 268, 270; given freedom, 
271 ; messenger to Titus, 274, 275. 

Jotapata, 266, 267. 

Judas, of Galilee, seizes Sepphoris, 
234; leads the Zealots, 249 ; killed, 



Judas Maccabeus, leader, 29; his 
policy, 30; victory at Emraaus, 32; 
at Bethsur, 33 ; restores the temple, 
34, 35; campaigns in Idumea 
and beyond Jordan, 36, 38; at 
Ephron, 37; attempt to reduce 
citadel, 40 ; defeat at Bethzechariah, 
42; victory at Adasa, 49; treaty 
with Rome, 51 ; defeat and death at 
Eleasa, 52 ; burial at Modein, 53 ; 
his character, 53. 

Judah ben Zabbai, 127. 

Judaism, in Palestine, 10; in Alex- 
andria, 10, 230; independence es- 
tablished, 104 ; its humiliation, 149 ; 
"Golden Age" of, 244; after the 
war, 280; last struggle for inde- 
pendence, 281 ; of the Dispersion, 
282, 283, 284. 

Judea, independence established, 104; 
made tributary to Rome, 135; re- 
organization under Caesar, 163; 
Augustan age of, 193; under Ro- 
man government, 246, 247; census 
in, 248; after the war, 279. 

"King of the Jews," birth of, 213. 

Leontopolis, temple built in, 74. 

Lights, Feast of, 35. 

Logos, Philo's conception of, 283. 

Lysias, defeat at Bethsur, 33; rivalry 
with Philip, 39, 40 ; besieges Jeru- 
salem, 43; compromises with the 
Jews, 44. 

Maccabean leaders, their relations 
with Pharisees and Sadducees, 114. 

Maccabean Period, date of, 3; stages 
in, 4. 

Maccabees, the meaning of name, 29. 

Maccabees I., book, period covered 
by, and date, 4 ; compared with Mac- 
cabees II., 5. 

Maccabees II., book, period covered 
by? 5 ; general character and date, 5. 

Machaerus, 175, 238. 

Malichus, 167, 168. 

Mariamne, marries Herod I., 176 ; 184, 
188; death of, 189. 

Masada, 172, 175. 

Mattathias, begins war, 3 ; at Modein, 

24; his defiance, 25; as leader, 26; 

death of, 28. 
Menahem, 263. 
Menelaus, 19. 

Messiah, prophecies of, 211, 228, 229. 
Messianic hope, influence of, 228 ; lit- 
erary form of, 152, 228, 229, 230; 

Pharisees' conception of, 108; of the 

Zealots, 249. 
Michmash, chosen as capital, 57. 
Mishna, 147, 222, 223. 
Mithridates, 132, 162. 
Mizpah, assembly at, 31. 
Modein, 24; Mattathias, buried at, 

28; Judas buried at, 53; Maccabean 

monument at, 69. 

Neapolitanus, 261. 

Nero, Emperor, 256, 265; death of, 

Nerva, 286. 
New Testament, 145, 146; taxation 

noted in, 249. 
Nicanor, 48; love for Judas, 48, 49; 

defeat and death at Adasa, 49; 

"Nicanor's day," 49. 
Nicholas of Damascus, 199, 208, 235. 

Obedas II., death of, 208. 

Onias III., fate of, 19. 

Onias IV., of Alexandria, 73, 74; 

builds temple in Heliopolis, 74 ; his 

temple closed, 279. 
Orodes, invades Syria, 170. 

Palestine, under Herod I., 203; after 
the war, 280. 

Parthia, 170. 

Parthians, in Palestine, 169; 174; at- 
tack Syria, 175. 

Phannias, high-priest, 270. 

Pharisees, first appear, 106; their 
spirit, doctrines, and influence, 107; 
their conception of future life, 108; 
of the Messianic state, 108 ; struggle 
with Sadducees, 111 ; supported by 
Alexandra, 122; stir up rebellion 



against Jannasus, 123; restore cere- 
monial observance, 128; revenge 
upon Sadducees, 129 ; " Golden 
age ' ' of Phariseeism, 130 ; retire 
from national councils, 131; end of 
first stage of conflict with Saddu- 
cees, 133; refuse allegiance to 
Herod, 181 ; promise Judean throne 
to Pheroras, 210; in the Sanhedrin, 
250; after the war, 278. 

Phasael, 166; subdues insurrection, 
168; tetrarch of Judea, 169; taken 
prisoner by Pacorus, 171 ; death of, 

Pheroras, 207, 210; death of, 211. 

Philip, appointed regent, 39. 

Philip, son of Herod, 232; his reign, 
240; coinage, 240; builds Caesarea 
Philippi, 241; death of, 241. 

Philo Judasus, 80; his teachings, 82; 
his hope, 230; 282; his influence, 
283; sent to Rome, 284. 

Pompey, 132; his generals in Syria, 
132; besieges Jerusalem, 133; takes 
temple mount, 135; sacrilege of 
Holy of Holies, 135; humanity to 
Jews, 154; value of his conquests, 
155 ; policy in Palestine, 155 ; defeat 
at Pharsalia, 161. 

Pontius Pilate, procurator, 251; of- 
fends Jews, 251 ; dismissed, 252. 

Porcius Festus, procurator, 256 ; death 
of, 257. 

Procurators, residence in Palestine, 
247 ; system of duties of, 247 ; checks 
upon authority of, 247. 

Provinces, Roman, arrangement of 
by Augustus, 246; governors for, 
247; Judea's rank among, 247. 

Psalms, Maccabean, see Appendix V. 

Psalms of Solomon, 136; their phari- 
saic origin, 136; their theology, 137; 
their doctrine of a future state, 139, 
156, 157; Messianic prophecies in, 

Ptolmeus, 199. 

Ptolemy Lathurus, 120; treaty with 
Jannaeus, 120; victory at Asphon, 
120; retires to Cyprus, 121. 

Ptolemy Philometor, 61. 

Ptolemy, son-in-law of Simon, be- 
trays Simon, 95 ; disappears, 98. 

Quirinius, legate of Syria, 248; takes 
census in Judea, 248. 

Rabbi Akiba, 281. 

Rabbinism, 220, 221, 278. 

Rabbinical literature, 146, 147." 

Rome, watchfulness of Syria, 50 ; in- 
fluence in Judea, 99 ; civil wars in, 
160 ; under Augustus, 191. 

Sabinus, procurator, 233 ; robs treas- 
ury, 234. 

Sadducees, their philosophy and faith, 
109; their doctrine of free will, 110; 
struggle with Pharisees, 111 ; per- 
secution by Pharisees, 129; appeal 
to Alexander, 129 ; end of strife with 
Pharisees, 133; as priests, 227; in 
Sanhedrin, 181, 250. 

Salome, 184; plot against Herod, 189; 
207, 208, 209, 210, 232. 

Samaria, 252, 255. 

Sameas, 165, 166. 

Sanhedrin, 165; loses power, 166; re- 
vival of power, 250; after the war, 

Scaurus, aids Aristobulus, 132, 133. 

Scribes, their work and influence, 221 ; 
place and power, 223, 224; their 
different types, 224; effect of their 
teaching, 225 ; in the Sanhedrin, 250, 

Septuagint, 77. 

Seron, battle with, 30. 

Shechem, 123. 

Shemaia, 165, 177 ; favors Herod, 181. 

Sibylline Oracles, number and use of, 
12 ; date of, 12 ; character of, 12, 
85, 86. 

Sicarii, 255, 257, 263. 

Silo, 175. 

Simon, chosen chief, 29 , campaign 
in Galilee, 36 ; made military 
commander, 64; made leader, 68; 
supports Demetrius II, 71; his 
leadership, 87; takes Gazara, 87; 
takes Bethsur, 88 ; takes citadel at 



Jerusalem, 88 ; benefits of his reign, 
89, 90 ; chosen governor, chief, and 
high-priest, 91; embassy to Rome, 
91; his coinage, 92, 93; compact 
with Antiochus, 94; defeats Sidetes, 
95; death of, 95. 

Sparta, treaty with, 66. 

Syllaeus, plots against Herod, 208. 

Synagogue, 218; origin, purpose, and 
influence, 219, 220; its services, 
225 ; after the war, 282. 

Talmud s, 147. 

Targums, 148. 

Tarichasa, 159, 268. 

Taxes, under Cassius, 167; under 
Augustus, 248. 

Temple, desecration of, 22; cleansed 
and re-dedicated by Judas, 34; pil- 
laged by Crassus, 159; rebuilt by 
Herod, 201; destroyed by Titus, 

Testaments of Twelve Patriarchs, 153. 

Tetrarcb, see Herod Antipas, and 

Theudas, the Pretender, 256. 

Tiberias, surrenders to Vespasian, 268. 

Tiberius Alexander, procurator, 254. 

Tiberius, supports Herod Antipas, 236 ; 
death of, 239 ; 284. 

Tigranes, 130. 

Titus, 268; takes Tarichaea, 268; be- 
sieges Jerusalem, 273; destroys 
Temple, 275 ; triumph at Rome, 276. 

Trachonitis, 208. 

Trajan, 286. 

Tryphon, driven out by Antiochus 
Sidetes, 94. 

Varus, 234. 

Vespasian, 265; invades Galilee, 267; 
takes Tiberias, 268; surrender of 
Josephus to, 268 ; goes to Italy, 269 ; 
made emperor, 272. 

Vitellius, 239 ; seeks to avenge Anti- 
pas, 239. 

Wisdom of .Solomon, date and char* 
acter of, 11, 82, 83, 84. 

Zadok, the house of, 109. 

Zealots, 248, 255, 257, 263, 266, 270, 

271, 272. 
Zeus, altar to, 22. 




i. 2 


.. 192 

Antiquities of Josephtjs. 

xii. 5, 1 19 

xii. 5, 4 22 

xii. 9, 7 22 

xii. 5, 4 23 

xii. G, 2 24 

xii. 6, 1 25 

xii. 7, 1 30 

xii. 7, 6 34 

xii. 8,3 37 

xii. 8,6 38 

xii. 9, 1 39 

xii. 9, 3 40 

xii. 9,3 41 

xii. 9, 7 44, 45 

xii. 11, 2 46 

xii. 10, 2 47 

xii. 10, 3 47 

xiii. 1, 2 54 

xiii. 6, 7 71 

xiii. 3,4 75 

xiii. 3,1 76 

xiii. 6,7 88 

xiii. 8, 2,3 99 

xiii. 9, 2 99 

xiii. 8, 4 101 

xiii. 9,3 101 

xiii. 10, 1 101 

xiii. 9, 1 102 

xiii. 10,2,3 103 

xiii. 5, 9 106 

xiii. 5, 9 110 

xiii. 5, 9. 107 

xiii. 10,5, 6 114 

xiii. 10,7 116 

xiii. 11,3 118 

xiii. 12, 2, 6 120 

xiii. 13, 2, 3 121 

xiii. 13, 5 123 

xiii. 14, 2 124 

xiii. 15, 5 125-127 

xiii. 16, 2, 3 129 

xiii. 16, 4 130 

xiv. 2-1, 2 132 


xiv. 2-3 133 

xiv. 3, 2 133 

xiv. 3, 3,4 134 

xiv. 5, 2, 4 157 

xiv. 5, 4 158 

xiv. 6, 2,3 158 

xiv. 8, 1,2 162 

xiv. 8, 3 163 

xiv. 10,22 100 

xiv. 10,2 163 

xiv. 10, 1,8,20,24 163 

xiv. 11,2 167 

xiv. 13,7,9 172 

xiv. 14,4 174 

xiv. 1-5 174 

xiv. 10, 6, 13, 14, 18 284 

xiv. 15,4,5 175 

xiv. 15, 7, 9, 11, 12 176 

xiv. 16,2 177 

xv. 1, 1 177 

xv. 2, 1,5 182 

xv. 3, 2,4 183 

xv. 3, 8,9 184 

xv. 5, 1,5 186 

xv. 6-7 <.. 186 

xv. 7, 2, 6 189 

xv. 7, 9, 10 190 

xv. 7, 1, 4 194 

xv. 8, 4 194 

xv. 8,5 194 

xv. 10,4 195 

xv. 9, 1,2,4 196 

xv. 9, 6 199 

xv. 11,2, 6 201 

xv. 11,3,5,7 201 

xv. 15, 1 174 

xvi. 1-2 204 

xvi. 2, 2, 5 205 

xvi. 3, 1, 3 206 

xvi. 4, 1,4 206 

xvi. 5, 1,3 197 

xvi. 7,2 207 

xvi. 7, 8 207 

xvi. 8, 2 209 

xvi. 10, 1 209 

xvi. 11, 1,7 210 

xvii. 1, 1 210 

xvii. 2,4 211 


xvii. 3, 1,2 211 

xvii. 4, 1,3 211 

xvii. 5, 1, 8 212 

xvii. 5,7, 1 212 

xvii. 6, 1,4 213 

xvii. 7, 1,2 240 

xvii. 9, 1,3 233 

xvii. 10, 1,2,4, 10 234 

xvii. 11, 1,5 235 

xvii. 13, 1, 5 236 

xvii. 11, 2 246 

xviii. 2-3 237 

xviii. 3, 5 284 

xviii. 5, 2 238 

xviii. 6, 10 239 

xviii. 4, 6, 10 241 

xviii. 6, 1, 10 242 

xviii. 7, 2 242 

xviii. 8,2 243 

xviii. 8,7,8 243 

xviii. 1,1 248 

xviii. 1, 1,6 249 

xviii. 1,1 249 

xviii. 1, 4 250 

xviii. 1, 6 251 

xviii. 3, 1 251 

xviii. 3,2 252 

xx. 1,1, 3 253 

xx. 4, 1,5 244 

xx. 5, 1 244 

xx. 5, 3 254 

xx. 5,4 255 

xx. 5, 8 256 

xx. 6, 1,3 255 

xx. 7,1 255 

xx. 8,6 256 

xx. 9, 4 258 

xx. 9, 6-7 258 

xx. 9, 2 228 

Book of Enoch. 

xxxiii., xxxiv 42 

lxxxiii., xc 42 

lxxxv., xc 42 

xc 15,39 42 

xci. 13 200 

lxxxiii., xc 228 



Book of Wisdom. 

i. 1,12 82 

i. 7 83 

iii. 7, 8 230 

iii. 652,794 230 

vi. 12 82 

vii. 25, 27 82 

vii. 26 83 

vii. 24 83 

vii. 22 83 

viii. 20 84 

ix. 18 24 

ix. 1,2 83 

ix. 15 84 

ix. 18 82 

xi. 5 82 

xi. 17 83 

xi. 24-26 84 

xii. 1 83 


i. 12 216 

De Execbat. 
sect. 89 230 

Db Pbem. et Proem. 
sect. 15,20 230 

Dio Cassitjs. 

xlviii. 4 219 

lxix. 14 281 

Jewish Wab. 

i. 3, 5 112 

i. 36 112 

i. 5, 2 127 

i. 8,25 157 

i. 21, 11 197 

i. 31, 5 212 

i. 1, 19 19 

ii. 8, 14 110 

ii. 8,5 112 

ii. 73 112 

ii. 21, 6-9 237 

ii. 8, 1 248 

ii. 2 255 

ii. 13,6 255 

ii. 13, 6 256 

ii. 4, 1 257 

ii. 14, 2 259 

ii. 8, 14 107,108 

ii. 17,2 260 

ii. 15,2 260 

ii. 16, 4 260 

ii. 14, 4-5 261 

ii. 14, 6, 9 2G1 

ii. 17,1,4 262 

ii. 17,4-6 263 

ii. 17,7, 10 263 

ii. 18, 1, 8 264 

ii. 18,10-11 264 

ii. 20, 3-4 264 

ii. 20,6 266 

ii. 21, 1-2 2GG 


ii. 21, 3, 6 266 

ii. 21,7 267 

iii. 6, 2,3 267 

iii. 7, 8 268 

iii. 9,7-8 268 

iii. 10, 1, 10 268 

iv. 1, 17 269 

iv. 1, 8 269 

iv. 2, 2,5 269 

iv. 9,2 270 

iv. 10,3,7 270 

iv. 3, 1, 12 270 

iv. 4,5, 1 271 

iv. 5, 5-6 271 

iv. 6, 1, 3 272 

v. 1,6 201 

v. 4 88 

v. 1,2,5 273 

v. 3, 1 273 

v. 7,2,3 274 

v. 8, 1, 12 274 

v. 9, 1, 14 274 

v. 12, 1-2 274 

vi. 2,4 251 

vi. 1,7,8 275 

vi. 1,1-2 275 

vi. 2, 1 275 

vi. 3, 1-2 275 

vi. 4, 1,7 275 

vi. 8, 1,5 276 

vii. 10, 3 74 

vii. 8, 9 276 


xv., xvii 199 

Keim, Jesus of Nazaba. 
i 282,283 

vol. iii. sect. 238 225 

I. Maccabees. 

i. 13-14 15 

i. 15 16 

i. 24 20 

i. 14 21 

i. 41, 50 21 

i. 31,32,39 22 

i. 51 22 

i. 62,64 23 

i. 60, 61 23 

ii. 34 17 

ii. 1, 14 25 

ii. 19,22 25 

ii. 24, 26 26 

ii. 27, 30 26 

ii. 30,41 26 

ii. 70 28 

iii. 10, 12 30 

iii. 18, 22 30 

iii. 23-24 30 

iii. 31,33 31 

iv. 8, 11 32 

iv. 28,35 32 

iv. 36-37 34 


iv. 37, 40 34 

iv. 42, 46 34 

v. 47, 59 35 

v. 1,7 36 

v. 9 37 

v. 9,54 37 

v. 62, 63 38 

v. 68 38 

vi. 1,15 39 

vi. 17 39 

vi. 18 40 

vi. 28, 31 41 

vi. 32, 41 41 

vi. 56 43 

vii. 1-2 46 

vii. 8, 18 47 

vii. 19-20 47 

vii. 21,25 48 

vii. 26 48 

vii. 27, 35 49 

viii. 17-18 51 

viii. 31-32 52 

ix. 6 52 

ix. 17-18 52 

ix. 19-20 53 

ix. 25-26 53 

ix. 28, 31 53 

ix. 33,49 54 

ix. 58, 72 57 

ix. 73 57 

x. 3, 13 59 

x. 15, 21 59 

x. 22, 50 60 

xi. 1, 19 62 

xi. 22, 28 62 

xi. 34 63 

xi. 38, 40 63 

xi. 53 64 

xi. 41, 53 64 

xi. 54 64 

xi. 55, 62 65 

xi. 70 65 

xi. 63,74 65 

xii. 9 65 

xii. 21 66 

xii. 24, 34 66 

xii. 35, 37 67 

xii. 39, 53 68 

xiii. 1, 9 68 

xiii. 10-11 69 

xiii. 12, 30 69 

xiii. 36, 40 71 

xiii. 43, 48 88 

xv. 37 88 

xv. 4, 15 90 

xv. 25,49 91 

xv. 24 92 

xv. 15, 24 92 

xv. 6 93 

II. Maccabees. 


i. 10 80 

ii. 24, 232 5 

ii. 19,32 6 

iv. 7-15 15 




iv. 9 16 

iT. 7, 10 18 

iv. 25.. 19 

iv. 42, 47 19 

t. 6 20 

v. 25-26 21 

vi. 2,4 22 

vi. 10 23 

vi. 18,31 24 

x. 1,8 35 

xi. 1, 12 33 

xii. 32, 37 38 

xii. 35 38 

xiv. 1 46 

xv. 12,16 49 


vii. 8 244 

Philo, Db Monarchia. 
ii. 1 282 





xni. 2 39 

xxxiii. 16 58 

xxxiii. 14, sect. 1 58 

Psalms of Solomon. 
.... 132, 136, 137, 139, 156, 
157, 229 

Sayings of thb Fathebs. 
ii. 8 223 

i. 1,227 130 

Son of Sibach. 
xxxviii. 24 22 

Stbabo. Page 
xvi. 2, 12 66 

Suetonius, "Octavianus." 
xiv, xv 173 

Suet., Vesp. 
v., vi 270 

Talmud Jeb. Kethuboth. 
viii. 11 128 

Tac. An. 

xii. 66,67 256 

ii. 42,43 251 

Tac Hist. 

v. 9 255 

ii. 1,4 270 

v. 12 273 





vi. 4, 9 219 

xiii. 13,2 219 

xiv. 19 74 

*ii. 2 108 

ii. 3,9 200 


ii. 4, 6 214 

iv. 10 249 

xiv. 53 250 

xxi. 31 249 

xxiii. 6,7 224 

vi. 17,29 238 


xiii. 1 239 

xxiii. 6, 11 239 


v. 37 249 

xii. 3 244 

xxiv. 24 256 

i. 3 83 

<H§e 9@t00age* ot tfie Bible 


Frank K. Sanders, Ph.D., President of Washburn College, 

Topeka, Kansas, and Professor Charles F. Kent, 

Ph.D., of Yale University 

A new series, in which emphasis is placed upon the concise, for- 
cible, and realistic interpretation of the Bible. The books of the 
Bible are grouped according to a natural classification, their contents 
arranged in the order of appearance, and a scholarly yet popular 
paraphrase of their distinctive thought given in plain and expressive 
English. The purpose of this series is to enable any reader of the 
Bible to understand its meaning as a reverent scholar of to-day does, 
and in particular to receive the exact impression which the words as 
originally heard or read must have made upon those for whom they 
were delivered. 

This series is not a substitute for the Bible, but an aid to the 
reverent, appreciative, and enthusiastic reading of the Scriptures ; in 
fact, it will serve the purpose of an 


Technicalities and unsettled questions will be, as far as possible, 
ignored. Ea h volume will be prepared by a leading specialist, and 
will contain such brief introductions as serve to put the reader into 
intelligent relation to the general theme treated. The editorial re- 
arrangement of the order of the Biblical books or sections will repre- 
sent the definite results of sober scholarship. 

I. The Messages of the Earlier Prophets. 

II. The Messages of the Later Prophets. 

HI. The Messages of the Law Givers. 

IV. The Messages of the Prophetical and Priestly His- 

V. The Messages of the Psalmists. 

VI. The Messages of the Sages. 

VII. The Messages of the Poets. 

VHI. The Messages of the Apocalyptic Writers. 

IX. The Messages of Jesus according to the Synoptists. 

X. The Messages of Jesus according to John. 

XI. The Messages of Paul. 

XII. The Messages of the Apostles. 









■■■■- ■- ■ ■ ■■-■.■■» 

■■- ms 



'••■-' ■ - •- 



15£8| ■:■•-:■ ■ 

3&KH5 SSSS '■■''•''■': ■rV ■■'■'•:' ■■■-■■■ ..'■'.-.■';';•. 

■■'■ -'^- '■■'■■■■'• ^v ,•:'■>:.. ;:.< .-■'-■■ ■;.;.:■■,:•.